A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Teachers at the Opportunity Charter School in New York City voted to unionize. Yes—that dirty, but often misunderstood word, unionize. The quotes below explain why they voted to unionize and explain why parents need to critically evaluate all schools and programs, including charter schools and suspect university programs for poor readers, like the Rutgers University Summer Reading Program.

As you evaluate schools and programs, look beyond the veneer. Remember the advertising for the infamous Yugo automobile. It hid mountains of problems. Today, the only people who seem happy with their Yugos use them as flowerpots. Like Yugo advertisements, some charters (and university programs) probably look far better than their reality. Also keep in mind that serious dissatisfaction causes unionization. After reading the quotes below, ask yourself: Would you want your child going here? If I’m going to send my child to a charter school, does it have a long track record of independently documented success, or just accolades from politicians and celebrities?

• Teachers Voted To Unionize. “In explaining their initial decision to unionize, Opportunity teachers said they felt that the school’s founding philosophy had changed and isolated their voices from school policy decisions.”
• A Company, Not A School Atmosphere. “‘The school has changed dramatically since I started. Now I feel like I work for a company, not a school,’” [said] … one of the school’s longest-tenured teachers.
• A Troubled History. “Opportunity Charter School has a short but troubled history. Founded …  in 2004 on a unique mission ^[4] to serve high rates of special education students and students with learning disabilities, the school struggled on performance reviews, prompting the [Department of Education] to  renew ^[5] its charter only on a shorted term. An investigation last year found aides physically abused students ^[6] in some instances of behavioral intervention.”

But wait—The Opportunity Charter School is just one school. You can believe all the good things that authorities like Secretary of Education Duncan say. Or can you?

• “Gary Rubinstein … carefully tracks the claims of miracle schools…. He shows that they continue to struggle despite the accolades of officials in search of a miracle…. [For example,] at Urban Prep, which Secretary Duncan singled out because 100 percent of its graduates were accepted to college, scores on state tests continued to be very low, well below those of Chicago district schools. Only 15 percent met … state assessment standards…. While 100 percent were accepted to college, zero percent were rated by the state as ‘college-ready.” (Diane Ravitch, Research Professor, New York University)

So, the question: Should you trust your child’s future to charter schools? And the answer: No. Be careful. Check everything. After you make a decision, keep monitoring your child’s progress.

Transparency: The author, Howard Margolis, graduated with a bachelor’s degree from a public university, worked in k-12 public schools and public universities for some 40 years, and has been a long-time union member. He believes that teacher unions are often the critical, positive force needed to improve education and help children. He also believes that charter schools, vouchers, and current testing policies are an ideological ruse to privatize education and distract the public from the real issues underlying poor school performance: poverty, economic immobility, and tax rates insufficient to sustain a compassionate, educated, innovative society.

References

Retrieved 11/27/2011, from http://gothamschools.org/2011/08/31/charter-school-teachers-clear-hurdle-in-pursuit-of-unionization/

The Opportunity Charter School

http://gothamschools.org/2009/10/19/a-school-has-a-year-to-prove-it-can-do-the-almost-impossible/

http://gothamschools.org/2010/02/16/city-ed-officials-recommend-renewal-for-opportunity-charter-school/

http://gothamschools.org/2010/05/19/manhattan-charter-school-accused-of-abusing-unruly-students/

Rutgers University Summer Reading Program

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-university%e2%80%99s-summer-reading-program-unethical.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-universitys-summer-reading-program-an-unflattering-dearth.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/can-10-hours-of-reading-instruction-work-miracles.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-universitys-summer-reading-program-critical-comments.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-university%e2%80%99s-10-hour-summer-reading-program-serious-concerns.htm

Urban Prep

Retrieved 12/15/2011, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-miracle-schools-not-so-miraculous-after-all/2011/12/07/gIQAP565fO_blog.html.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

howard@reading2008.com

www.reading2008.com

**********************************************************************************************************************************

 To Help Children: The Special Needs Talk Radio Network

The Special Needs Talk Radio network is dedicated to helping parents and teachers help children with special needs. For a description and schedule of its six shows, go to http://specialneedstalkradio.com.

Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and I host Maximizing Your Child’s Potential (Mondays, 9 PM – 9:30 PM EST, http://specialneedstalkradio.com/maximizing-your-childs-potential).

 Monday’s Radio Show

Public and Private School Programs: Pros and Cons

• When: Monday, 12/19/2011, 9 – 9:30 PM EST
• Where: http://specialneedstalkradio.com/maximizing-your-childs-potential
• Guest: Staci Greenwald, Esq., Special Education Attorney

**************************************************************************************************************************************

 Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds

(www.reading2008.com)

PsychologyToday.com wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher and author wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.”  A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.”

The KansasCityExaminer.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. The Coffee Klatch awarded it a Coffee Klatch emblem, signifying excellence.

We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words. And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB

Description

Warns parents to look beyond the hype attributed to many charter schools. Give 2 recent examples.

Tags

Charter school, charter schools, charters, Dyslexia, dyslexic, dyslexics, Learning Disabilities, learning disability, Reading Disabilities, reading disability, reading problem, reading problems, struggling reader, Struggling Readers

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

If your child reads at a second grade level or above, and reads words and sentences accurately—-but slowly and laboriously or without adequate expression—-he needs help with reading fluency.  If his school won’t provide adequate fluency instruction, discuss these questions and answers with school personnel. They may not be aware of fluency’s importance and the ease with which teachers can help many students become fluent readers.

What is reading fluency?

A good analogy for understanding reading fluency comes from public speaking. Fluent public speakers embed in their voices those same elements that are associated with reading fluency – accuracy in speech, appropriate speed, and phrasing and expression. The speaker’s use of these aspects of fluency facilitates the listener’s comprehension. Speaking in appropriate phrases, emphasizing certain words, raising and lowering volume, and varying intonation help the listener understand what the speaker is trying to communicate (Rasinski, 2004, p. 2).

Is reading fluency important?

Scientifically-based research reviews have established that reading fluency is a critical component of learning to read and that an effective reading program needs to include instruction in fluency (Rasinski, 2004, p. 2, references removed)

Fluency problems can also dampen self-efficacy and motivation for reading, as students’ find reading difficult, laborious, and unsatisfying (Margolis, 2004, p. 193).

What are the components of reading fluency?

Fluency incorporates both automaticity—the quick, accurate, and virtually instantaneous recognition of words—and prosody, or reading expressively with such features as appropriate pitch, stress, and phrasing. As such, fluency has been referred to as a bridge to comprehension, in part because both of these elements play an important role in skilled reading. Automaticity allows students to recognize words effortlessly, thereby freeing their working memory from the mentally draining, slow work of decoding and allowing them to attend to meaning. Next, prosody incorporates elements of expression and phrasing, helping to shape the meaning of a sentence in speech. The same is true in written language. Is the narrator being sarcastic? Who is voicing the words inside the quotation marks? Is the situation being described comical or sad? Prosody adds expression to written text, helping to engage learners in their reading and adding an important element to the overall process of understanding text (Kuhn & Schwanenflugel, 2006, p. 2, references removed).

To develop fluency, should students read lots of “hard” or lots of “easy” books?

To build fluency, students need to read easy books filled with words they can recognize (Richek et al, 1996, p. 130)

Students need regular opportunities to read easy materials—materials at their independent level—to enhance and develop their reading fluency (Heilman, Blair, & Rupley, 2002, p. 270).

With so many components, reading fluency sounds complicated. Can teachers actually teach fluency in the schools?

Well-designed oral reading instruction can take a number of forms. Among these are

(a) echo and choral reading

(b) repeated reading

(c) paired repeated reading

(d) paired and partner reading

(e) reading while listening

(f ) radio reading

(g) reader’s theatre

(h) Fluency-Oriented Reading Instruction (FORI)

(i) wide reading, and even

(j) the use of captioned television….

Each of these approaches has been shown to be effective both in research and in clinical and classroom practice and each is relatively easy to implement (Kuhn & Schwanenflugel, 2006, p. 4, references removed).

References

Heilman, A. J., Blair, T. R., & Rupley, W. H. (2002). Principles and practices of teaching reading (10^th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill

Kuhn, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. (2006). All Oral Reading Practice Is Not Equal or How Can I Integrate Fluency Into My Classroom? Literacy Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 1-20, p. 2.

Margolis, H. (2004). Struggling readers: What consultants need to know. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 15(2), 191-204

Rasinski, T. (2004). Assessing reading fluency. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning. Available for download from www.prel.org/programs/rel/rel.asp.

Richek, M. A., Caldwell, J. S., Jennings, J. H., & Lerner, J. W. (1996). Reading problems: Assessment and teaching strategies. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

howard@reading2008.com

www.reading2008.com

*************************************************************************************************************************************

Free Podcast

Overcoming Problems of Reading Fluency

Dr. Tim Rasinski of Kent State University

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/specialneedstalkradio/2011/10/18/maximizing-your-childs-potential

Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds

(www.reading2008.com)

PsychologyToday.com wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher and author wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.”  A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.”

The KansasCityExaminer.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. The Coffee Klatch awarded it a Coffee Klatch emblem, signifying excellence.

We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words. And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Parents, teachers, administrators, and politicians often demand the best reading method. Nothing less will do. So, of the hundreds of reading methods, which is best?

Sorry for the answer, but here it is: It’s not Wilson, Orton-Gillingham, Reading Recovery, Read180, whole language, phonics-phonics-phonics, or the newest basal reader system. It’s the one that works for your child. It’s the one that effectively teaches word recognition, decoding, fluency, comprehension, writing, spelling, study skills, independent work abilities, and an enduring love of reading. It’s the one that teachers believe in, understand, and use skillfully. It’s the one they can easily adapt, modify, or abandon if it’s not working for your child. It’s the one that all the school’s teachers and administrators supplement, support, reinforce, and extend throughout the day. Bottom line: It’s not a package, it can’t be named. It’s different for different children. Its belief, commitment, knowledge, skill, adaptability, innovation, and support.

• There is no single method or single combination of methods that can successfully teach all children to read. Therefore, teachers must have a strong knowledge of multiple methods for teaching reading and a strong knowledge of the children in their care so they can create the appropriate balance of methods needed for the children they teach. (International reading Association, 1999)
• In the end, enhanced reading proficiency rests largely on the capacity of classroom teachers to provide expert, exemplary reading instruction…. Such teaching cannot be packaged. Exemplary teaching is not regurgitation of a common script but is responsive to children’s needs. In the end it will become clearer that there are no ‘proven programs,’ just schools in which we find more expert teachers—teachers who need no script to tell them what to do. (Allington, 2002, p. 747)
• For too long the quest has been focused on discovering the one best way to teach reading and writing. We believe that there can be no such approach. Learning to read and write is a complex activity. Children differ, teachers differ, and communities differ, and each work to preclude the discovery of any single best way to develop literacy. Different children, at different stages of development, at different times, in different schools, taught by different teachers, prosper and develop their literacy. Shift any one of these variables and the same children may flounder. (Allington, & Cunningham, 1996, p. 62)

If you’re the parent of a struggling reader, we suggest that you not seek the best method or “magic bullet,” but make sure that whatever your child’s teachers are doing is working for him: he’s a successful reader who loves to read.

To do this, frequently listen to your child read, monitor his homework progress, and observe his willingness to read on his own. If he’s eligible for special education, make sure his Individualized Education Program (IEP) has realistic, relevant, measurable goals (and in some states, objectives) that the school measures frequently and accurately. Chapter 7 of Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds (www.reading2008.com, www.amazon.com) offers many ideas on how to monitor your child’s progress. Chapters 8 through 13 explain how to resolve conflicts and effectively advocate for children.

References

Allington, R. L. (June 2002). What I’ve learned about effective reading instruction. Phi Delta Kappan, 740, 742-747.

Allington, R. L., & Cunningham, P. M. (1996). Schools that work: Where all children read and write. NY: HarperCollins.

International Reading Association (1999). IRA Position Statement. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

howard@reading2008.com

www.reading2008.com

*************************************************************************************************************************************************

The Special Needs Talk Radio Network: It’s On The Air

The new Special Needs Talk Radio network (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/) is on the air. Each of its six shows is dedicated to improving the lives of children and youth with special needs and their families.

Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and I host Maximizing Your Child’s Potential (Mondays, 9 PM – 9:30 PM EST, http://specialneedstalkradio.com/maximizing-your-childs-potential).

On Monday, October 10^th, our guest will be Dr. J. Richard Gentry, Educational Consultant. He’ll discuss Raising Confident Readers: Birth and Beyond.

Dr. Gentry earned his Elementary Education degree from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, and a Ph.D. in Reading Education from the University of Virginia in 1977. For sixteen years he taught Reading Education at Western Carolina University where he directed the Reading Center. He is well known for his research and writing in literacy education and is currently an independent researcher, author, and educational consultant.

Over the next few months, our guests will include:

• October 17^th —Dr. Tim Rasinski, Kent State University, Overcoming Problems of Reading Fluency
• October 24^th —Susan Orloff, OTR/L, Occupational Therapist, Learning Re-Enabled
• October 31^st —Dr. Nancy Padak, Kent State University, Helping Your Children Overcome Reading Problems
• Dr. Richard Boon, University of Georgia, Helping Teenagers Improve Their Reading
• Dr. Erica Lembke, University of Missouri, Monitoring Your Child’s Progress
• Dr. Patrick McCabe, Mercy College, Developing the Confidence of Struggling Learners
• Staci Greenwald, Special Education Attorney, The Pro’s and Con’s of Public and Private School Programs
• Dr. Annmarie Urso, State University of New York at Geneseo, How Response-To-Intervention ( RTI) Can Unlock Your Child’s Potential

If possible, look at the Special Needs Talk Radio’s website (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/). See how its many experts can help you help the children and youth you care about.

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Three common curriculum gaps that can intensify children’s reading problems are failing to teach them phonological awareness, automatic word recognition, and an alternative to single letter phonics.

Teach Phonological Awareness. This is the ability to identify and manipulate sounds within spoken words. For example, say the word bat without the /b/ sound. Unfortunately, may struggling readers struggle with phonological awareness. To develop proficiency, they need instruction.

• Good phonics instruction should develop phonological awareness. The key to learning to decode words is the [alphabetic] principle that letters can represent sounds (p. 339) …. The key to the development of the alphabetic principle, word recognition, and invented spelling is phonological awareness…. Phoneme awareness [part of phonological awareness] is the awareness of sounds in spoken words. As words are spoken, most sounds cannot be said by themselves. For example, the spoken word /cat/ has one continuous sound and is not pronounced “kuh-a-tuh.” Children ordinarily concentrate on the meaning and do not think of the sounds in the word. But, since letters represent sounds, a child must learn to think of words as having both meaning and sound in order to understand the alphabetic principle. (Stahl, Duffy-Hester, & Stahl, 1998, p. 340, references omitted)

Teach Automatic Word Recognition. Struggling readers who accurately identify words—slowly and laboriously—will likely tire of reading, resist reading, and become overwhelmed by the volume of all they must read. Three keys to helping these children become fluent readers are to teach them how to quickly and accurately recognize words, to give them lots of daily practice in doing so,  and to engage them in lots reading they find easy and enjoyable. This will help them to quickly identify words.

• Good phonics instruction leads to automatic word recognition. In order to read books, children need to be able to read words quickly and automatically. If a child stumbles over or has to decode slowly too many words, comprehension will suffer. Although we want children to have a strategy for decoding words they do not know, we also want children to recognize many words automatically and be able to read them in context. (Stahl, Duffy-Hester, & Stahl, 1998, p. 343, references omitted)

Teach Word Families. Many phonics programs emphasize the sounds of individual letters and emphasize sounding out most words one or two letters at a time. This helps many struggling readers to quickly and accurately identify unknown words. But many does not mean all.  Here’s a way that can help struggling readers who struggle with the sounds of individual letters, especially vowel sounds. It uses word families, such ake: bake, brake, cake, make, quake, rake, sake, snake, take.  Word families are also called phonograms or rimes.

• Recent scholarly inquiry into how children learn to decode words suggests that knowledge of certain sound and letter patterns in words may help readers figure out unfamiliar words. This is often called the analogy approach to word recognition, and a considerable amount of research supports its use as an instrument for word-recognition instruction…. Predominant among such letter patterns are onsets and rimes….  An onset is formed by the individual consonant or consonant combination (such as pl, ph, st, sch, str, or th) that precedes the first vowel in a word or syllable. Rimes are another name for letter combinations that we have for years called “phonograms” or “word families,” the part of a syllable that contains the vowel and all subsequent consonants. For example, in the word bat, the b is the onset and the at is the rime; in slick, the sl is the onset and the ick is the rime. Fry (1998) has pointed out that just 38 common rime patterns can be used by readers to decode 654 one-syllable words. Moreover, these same rimes can also be helpful for partial decoding of a much larger number of longer, more difficult, multisyllabic words. (Rasinski, 1999)

If your child struggles to identify unknown words when reading, ask yourself:

• Has the school assessed his phonological awareness skills? If they’re poor, are his teachers teaching him how to identify and manipulate sounds he hears in words?
• Are his teachers teaching him to recognize words quickly and accurately, or just accurately?
• If he struggles when using individual letters to sound out (decode) unknown words, can his teachers teach him to use word families (rimes, phonograms)?

References

Rasinski, T. (1999). Making and Writing Words Using Letter Patterns. Retrieved 9/22/2011, from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/rasinski/MWW_LP.html.

Stahl, S.A., Duffy-Hester, A.M., & Stahl, K.A.D. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 338-355.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

howard@reading2008.com

www.reading2008.com

*************************************************************************************************************************************************

The Special Needs Talk Radio Network: It’s On The Air

The new Special Needs Talk Radio network (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/ ) is on the air. Each of its six shows is dedicated to improving the lives of children and youth with special needs and their families.

Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and I host Maximizing Your Child’s Potential (Mondays, 9 PM – 9:30 PM EST, http://specialneedstalkradio.com/maximizing-your-childs-potential).

This coming Monday, September 26th, our guest will be Dr. Richard Selznick, Director of the Cooper University Hospital Learning Center. If your child struggles in school, if he’s a “shut-down” learner, Dr. Selznick will offer insight and practical tips for motivating and helping him.

Over the next few months, our guests will include:

• Dr. John Pellitteri, City University of New York, Strengthening Your Child’s Emotional Intelligence
• Dr. Tim Rasinski, Kent State University, Overcoming Problems of Reading Fluency
• Dr. Nancy Padak, Kent State University, Helping Your Children Overcome Reading Problems
• Dr. Richard Boon, University of Georgia, Helping Teenagers Improve Their Reading
• Dr. Erica Lembke, University of Missouri, Monitoring Your Child’s Progress
• Dr. Patrick McCabe, Mercy College, Developing the Confidence of Struggling Learners
• Staci Greenwald, Special Education Attorney, The Pro’s and Con’s of Public and Private School Programs
• Dr. J. Richard Gentry, Educational Consultant, Raising Confident Readers: Birth and Beyond
• Dr. Annmarie Urso, State University of New York at Geneseo, How Response-To-Intervention ( RTI) Can Unlock Your Child’s Potential

If possible, look at the Special Needs Talk Radio’s website (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/). See how its many experts can help you help the children and youth you care about.

• Dr. Richard Selznick, Cooper University Hospital, Helping the Shut-Down Learner
• Dr. John Pellitteri, City University of New York, Strengthening Your Child’s Emotional Intelligence
• Dr. Tim Rasinski, Kent State University, Overcoming Problems of Reading Fluency
• Dr. Nancy Padak, Kent State University, Helping Your Children Overcome Reading Problems
• Dr. Richard Boon, University of Georgia, Helping Teenagers Improve Their Reading
• Dr. Erica Lembke, University of Missouri, Monitoring Your Child’s Progress
• Dr. Patrick McCabe, Mercy College, Developing the Confidence of Struggling Learners
• Staci Greenwald, Special Education Attorney, The Pro’s and Con’s of Public and Private School Programs
• Dr. J. Richard Gentry, Educational Consultant, Raising Confident Readers: Birth and Beyond

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

As many readers of our blog know, a direct mail advertisement from Rutgers University Continuing Studies promised that its 10-hour summer reading program of potentially large classes would quickly “turn poor readers into good readers.” The letter made other promises:

• Your child will become a strong, independent reader, build confidence, and become more successful in school.
• Your child will complete reading assignments more quickly and easily, be more successful in school, and become a strong, enthusiastic reader.

If these claims are valid, a great university like Rutgers would surely have a wealth of information supporting these claims, claims I think are false promises that can immeasurably damage poor readers. Does Rutgers University have such information? So far, the university’s Continuing Studies has stonewalled my requests for information. And my requests to the university’s equivalent of a freedom of information office have failed to yield any information supporting Rutgers’ claims. Here are the office’s latest responses; note the word “denied” and the phrase “responsive records do not exist”:

• Request 1. “You requested all standardized test documents or summary reports for poor readers of elementary school age who attended one or more of the summer reading programs….  Because your request is overbroad and responsive records do not exist at the University, your request is denied.”

• Request 2. “You requested any documents that name the standardized tests used to evaluate the progress of poor readers in Request 1 and any documents that discuss the test reliability or validity…. Accordingly, because your request is overbroad and responsive records do not exist at the University, your request is denied.”

• Request 3. “You requested any documents that statistically evaluated the progress of the poor readers in Request 1…. Because your request is overbroad and responsive records do not exist at the University, your request is denied.”

• Request 4. “You requested any test results showing the progress made by poor readers in Request 1…. Accordingly, your request for the test scores and the names of the standardized tests from which scores were calculated is denied because it is a request for information.”

• Request 5. “You requested a copy of any documents that list the educational degrees, New Jersey state teacher certifications or other state teacher certifications held by the instructors/teachers in the summer reading programs…. Because your request is overbroad and responsive records do not exist at the University, your request is denied.”

It’s troubling that a great university like Rutgers lacks or cannot identify responsive records. Shortly, I’ll try to get the names of specific documents and then request them. I expect this will be a bureaucratic “catch-22.” In other words, futile. And if the records don’t exist, damning for the integrity and ethics of Rutgers University and its concern for children who struggle with reading.

Unfortunately, Rutgers University has yet to offer information that changes my advice to parents:

For parents of ‘poor readers’ (and parents of children with other disabilities), I have a simple, straightforward opinion about getting help for your children: Beware. Some people, universities, and private companies with impressive titles will promise you quick fixes. They may or may not know better. But quick fixes will not help “poor readers” (and children with other disabilities). If quick fixes could, schools would quickly eliminate most reading problems.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

www.reading2008.com

howard@reading2008.com

****************************************************************************************************************************

Special Needs Talk Radio Network: Launching September 6th

On Tuesday, September 6, the new Special Needs Talk Radio network (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/ ) will launch six new radio shows.  Each show is dedicated to improving the lives of children and youth with special needs and their families.

On Monday evenings, Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and I will host Maximizing Your Child’s Potential (9 PM – 9:30 PM EST, http://specialneedstalkradio.com/maximizing-your-childs-potential).

Future guests on our show will include:

• Dr. Steven Lange, Child and Adolescent Psychologist, Helping Children Overcome Sleep Problems
• Dr. Richard Selznick, Cooper University Hospital, Helping the Shut-Down Learner
• Dr. John Pellitteri, City University of New York, Strengthening Your Child’s Emotional Intelligence
• Dr. Tim Rasinski, Kent State University, Overcoming Problems of Reading Fluency
• Dr. Nancy Padak, Kent State University, Helping Your Children Overcome Reading Problems
• Dr. Richard Boon, University of Georgia, Helping Teenagers Improve Their Reading
• Dr. Sarah Allen, Educational Consultant, How Neuropsychologists Can Help Parents Develop Quality IEPs
• Dr. Erica Lembke, University of Missouri, Monitoring Your Child’s Progress
• Dr. Patrick McCabe, Mercy College, Developing the Confidence of Struggling Learners
• Staci Greenwald, Special Education Attorney, The Pro’s and Con’s of Public and Private School Programs
• Dr. J. Richard Gentry, Educational Consultant, Raising Confident Readers: Birth and Beyond

If possible, look at the Special Needs Talk Radio’s website (http://specialneedstalkradio.com/). See how its lineup of experts can help you help the children and youth you care about.

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Many proponents of particular reading approaches relentlessly bash other approaches. These proponents can be anyone. They can be teachers, professors, parents, politicians, or special education advocates. Many are well intentioned, but have little or no experience teaching reading, have little or no understanding of the relevant research, or have psychologically imprisoned themselves with strong ideologies that distort their observations and thinking. Many ignore all facts and research that undermine their beliefs, stress only those that support them, and fight vigorously to prove they’re never wrong, always right; they suffer from cognitive dissonance. Sadly, the decisions they make or influence can hurt children with reading disabilities.

Two routinely bashed approaches are “whole language” and its close cousin, the language experience approach. Here are quick descriptions of both:

Language Experience Approach: An approach to language learning in which students’ oral compositions are transcribed and used as materials of instruction for reading, writing, speaking, and listening. (Harris & Hodges, 1995, p. 134)

Whole Language: The emphasis is on connected text [e.g., sentences and paragraphs], groups of words that convey meaning. Learning regarding the alphabet is assumed to take place implicitly…. The teacher teaches phonics as opportunities arise during authentic reading and writing. [Many whole language teachers do not teach phonics daily or in systematic and explicit ways.] (Cooper & Kiger, 2003, p. 223) The use of controlled vocabulary aimed at giving students control of a predetermined set of words is seen as being artificial, meaningless, and misdirected. Likewise, the isolation of skills and the tendency to teach skills to mastery are seen as inappropriate. (Tierney & Readence, 2005, pp. 50-51)

Do these approaches have flaws? You bet. Like phonics, like basal reading programs, like all approaches, they’re limited. They don’t help all children. They don’t match the abilities and philosophies of all teachers. They’re not effective at all stages of reading development. But they have value, sometimes tremendous value. Here’s a brief summary of the research:

[A review of the research suggests] that, overall, whole language/language experience approaches were approximately equal to basal reading approaches in their effects…. These results, however, were not consistent across all studies. Whole language/language experience approaches appear to be more effective when used in kindergarten or when used instead of a reading readiness program and seem to have had greater effects on measures of word recognition than on measures of comprehension…. From the data reviewed, it appears that whole language approaches may have an important function early in the process of learning to read, but that as the child’s needs shift, they become less effective. It could also be that the philosophy behind whole language/language experience approaches, that the function of reading is to communicate, needs to be learned by children early, but, once learned, children need to be able to decode written language fluently and automatically in order to be able to use reading for that purpose. (Stahl & Miller, 2006, pp. 27, 31)

I’m not a natural fan of these approaches. They just don’t match my personality. They’re vaguely defined. From teacher-to-teacher, they’re implemented so differently. But in some situations I’ve supported their use with beginning readers because the programs were working. Perhaps they worked because the teachers believed in them and supplemented them with explicit, systematic phonics or other methods that went far beyond orthodox views of the approaches. And sometimes, for good reason, I continued to use them to teach children with reading disabilities. The reason: they were working.

In future posts, we’ll discuss other programs that are routinely and unfairly bashed. We’ll also stress this point: regardless of the reading approach, children with reading disabilities, sometimes referred to as struggling readers or poor readers, need teachers who

• Are highly knowledgeable and skilled about different ways of teaching reading
• Have many teaching resources
• Have sufficient time to devote to the individual needs of children in their classes
• Frequently monitor the progress of children
• Work in schools that support them socially, psychologically, and professionally
• Adapt quickly and effectively to the needs of struggling readers

So, should you join the bashers and bash the whole language and language experience approaches to beginning reading? If your child is a beginning reader with an Individualized Education Program (IEP), or is a second or third grader who struggles to read first grade materials, should you demand that his teachers use other approaches? Both answers: No. Instead, support their use if the teachers’ use them enthusiastically, if they make whatever adjustments your child needs, and if your child is successfully learning to read.

No doubt, some blog readers with great knowledge of this topic will disagree with me. If you’re one of them, please feel free to comment.

References

Cooper, D. J., & Kiger, N. D. (2001). Literacy Assessment: Helping Teachers Prepare Instruction. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Harris, T. L., & Hodges, R. E. (1995). The Literacy Dictionary: The Vocabulary of Reading and Writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Stahl, S. A., & Miller, P. D. (2006). Whole language and language experience approaches to beginning reading: a quantitative research synthesis. In K. Dougherty Stahl, & M. C. McKenna, (Eds.), Reading Research at Work: Foundations of Effective Practice (pp. 9-35). NY: The Guilford Press. [This is a great book for professionals and for parents who want a graduate course in research on reading. -- HM]

Tierney, R. J., & Readence, J. E. (2005). Reading Strategies and Practices: A Compendium (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

www.reading2008.com

howard@reading2008.com

*************************************************************************************************************************************

Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds (www.reading2008.com)

Psychology Today.com recently wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher and author wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.”  A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.” The Kansas City Examiner.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words.

And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

As many readers of our blog know, a direct mail advertisement from Rutgers University Continuing Studies promised that its 10-hour summer reading program of potentially large classes would quickly “turn poor readers into good readers.” The letter made other promises:

• Your child will become a strong, independent reader, build confidence, and become more successful in school.
• Your child will complete reading assignments more quickly and easily, be more successful in school, and become a strong, enthusiastic reader.

These promises seemed so exaggerated and false that they disturbed me. So I wrote the Associate Vice President for Continuous Education of Rutgers University’s Continuing Studies. Here’s part of his response:

Our 8 years of experience, and concomitant evaluations of this program, support every single claim in the promotional material for this program…. Rutgers Reading specialists [sic] have reviewed and approved the materials in use. Rutgers faculty review the program evaluations and the instructor training program.

Afterwards,  he stonewalled my request for evaluation information.

An Unflattering Dearth of Information

And so I used New Jersey’s version of the freedom of information act to get relevant information for one of the counties I’m familiar with, in which Rutgers runs numerous 10-hour summer reading classes. Below are the answers from the Rutgers’ freedom of information officer:

• You requested all standardized test scores for poor readers of elementary school age who attended the Institute of Reading Development’s summer reading programs in Camden County in 2009 and 2010 and the names of the standardized tests from which the scores were calculated….  Please be advised that the information you seek does not exist.

• You requested copies of evaluations or assessment documents of the Institute of Reading Development’s summer reading programs by faculty of the Rutgers University Graduate School of Education or any of the university’s degree granting units.  Documents responsive to this request do not exist.  Because the documents you request do not exist, your request is denied.

You decide about the candor and accuracy of the Vice-President’s statements, and thus about the value of Rutgers’ 10-hour summer reading program. Ask yourself:

• Did Rutgers carefully and objectively evaluate the progress of the poor readers attending the many summer reading programs it ran in Camden County in 2009 and 2010?
• Did this lack of information support “every single claim” Rutgers made about turning “poor readers into good readers”?
• Did the Rutgers’ Vice President exaggerate the care with which Rutgers monitored the quality and effectiveness of its summer reading programs? Were his definitions of the phrases  “concomitant evaluations …. program evaluations …. [and] Rutgers faculty” so unique as to be deceptive?

Although I believe the answers condemn Rutgers’ summer reading program, I may be wrong.  So, to see if the information I received generalized to Rutgers’ other program sites, I requested additional information for more counties and years. Perhaps this information will put Rutgers’ and the Vice-President’s comments in a positive light. When I get the information, I’ll post my interpretation.

Valuable Information

For further information about why I think Rutgers’ University may be hurting poor readers, see

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/beware-of-university-programs-for-poor-readers.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/can-10-hours-of-reading-instruction-work-miracles.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-university%e2%80%99s-10-hour-summer-reading-program-serious-concerns.htm

http://www.reading2008.com/blog/rutgers-universitys-summer-reading-program-critical-comments.htm

A Widespread Problem

If my opinion about the deceptiveness and inadequacy of Rutgers University’s 10-hour summer reading program for poor readers is correct, many children around the nation might have or will be harmed. Why? Many university continuing education units across the nation are offering the same or similar 10-hour programs, promising that they will quickly turn poor readers into good ones.  Knowing what we know about the complex needs of poor readers and the enormous knowledge, skill, effort, and time it takes to improve their reading (and in many cases, the need to strengthen their confidence, optimism, and emotional well-being) and the nature of the Rutgers’ summer reading program, I need to ask:

• Are the universities offering these programs doing so for the money, with little or no concern for the children?
• Do their continuing education units understand the difficulties that poor readers face?
• Do their continuing education units understand the implications of their promises and how their programs might hurt children?

The Lesson for Parents: Beware

For parents of “poor readers” (and parents of children with other disabilities), I have a simple, straightforward opinion about getting help for your children: Beware. Some people, universities, and private companies with impressive titles will promise you quick fixes. They may or may not know better. But quick fixes will not help “poor readers” (and children with other disabilities). If quick fixes could, schools would quickly eliminate most reading problems.

Howard Margolis © Reading2008 & Beyond

www.reading2008.com

howard@reading2008.com

*************************************************************************************************************************************

Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds (www.reading2008.com)

Psychology Today.com recently wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher and author wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.”  A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.” The Kansas City Examiner.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words.

And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Take lots of photos of your child doing safe, enjoyable July 4^th kinds of things. Show him the photos and discuss them with him in relaxed, informal ways. During your conversation, stress two or three common words you think he can learn. Informally, tell him the meaning of the words and use them whenever it fits the situation. Encourage him to use the words. Avoid stress. Have fun.

For older children, give them a camera and discuss some of their photos. Again, informally stress only a few common words they can learn. Have fun.

Howard Margolis (c) Reading2008 & Beyond        www.reading2008.com howard@reading2008.com

********************************************************************************************************************************************************

Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds (www.reading2008.com)

Psychology Today.com recently wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher and author wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.”  A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.” The Kansas City Examiner.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words.

And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB

A Blog by Dr. Gary G. Brannigan and Dr. Howard Margolis

Recently, I received a letter from high ranking official at a major public university with a great reputation; the letter advertised a set of programs that promised to quickly “turn poor readers into good readers.” This promise disturbed me, as did the letter’s other promises:

• “Your child will become a strong, independent reader, build confidence [sic], and become more successful in school.”
• “Your child will complete reading assignments more quickly and easily, be more successful in school, and become a strong, enthusiastic reader.”
• “Your son or daughter will complete homework assignments quickly and easily, get better grades, and become a more motivated student.”

Notice the three “wills” I underlined and made bold. These are promises. I’ve never met parents of “poor readers” who wouldn’t want their children to become strong, independent, enthusiastic readers and motivated, successful students who quickly and easily completed homework. But like many of us, I’ve learned that when something sounds too good, it probably is. To check it out, I called the “800” number in the University’s letter, spoke not to a University representative but to a representative of a company with an impressive sounding academic name. After speaking to the representative, I concluded that the specific reading program—which the representative selected as appropriate for two struggling readers I had described vaguely to her—was no more credible than the representative’s over-the-phone, sight-unseen assessment of the two children’s program needs.

The program she recommended offered a maximum of 10-hours of summer school instruction, in a class with one teacher and as many as 20-children, some or all with reading problems. At best, I consider such a program(s) inadequate to quickly “turn poor readers into good readers.” And the program(s), which the letter called a “community service” of the University, would cost parents $329 per child plus the cost of materials. Parents who enrolled more than one child would get a $30 discount. The letter did not describe many of the programs details, such as classes of up to 20-children, which at $329 per child could gross up to $6,580 ($329 x 20) per class. I asked myself: “Does this sound like a “community service” or a profit-making venture?”

The next set of paragraphs offer details about the program, the company’s representative, and the teachers. The company’s representative provided the details about the program(s) and teachers, but only when questioned. After listening to her describe the program(s) and its teachers, I was horrified. It lacked many of the essential ingredients that my decades of graduate teaching and study in special education and reading disabilities taught me were critical to meaningfully help poor readers become good ones. I asked myself, “Why was much of this information not in the letter? Does this university official—who does not appear to be a faculty member in his university’s graduate reading program—know this meager program might hurt ‘poor readers’ and their parents?”

The Program: Classes have one teacher, can have up to 20-children, meet once a week, for 2-hours per week, for 5-weeks, for a total of 10-hours. The children’s teachers conduct a reading assessment of the children’s strengths and weakness during the first session. (I thought, in 10-hours one teacher can’t make poor readers into good ones, as this often takes years of expert tutoring or small group instruction. Assessing one poor reader’s reading problems often take hours and requires expertise far beyond that of most teachers, even teachers with graduate degrees.)

The Company’s Representative: She understood that the two children I had vaguely described were “struggling” readers who were reading well below grade level. She asserted that they would reap great benefits from the program she recommended: they would become stronger, more independent readers who read fluently, with good comprehension, would figure out multisyllabic words readily and easily. “By the end of the program… they’ll have all the skills and confidence that they need.” It will be easy to find books for them.

I asked her about the Orton-Gillingham and Benchmark programs, two widely-discussed, widely-used remedial reading programs; she never heard of them. I asked if the teachers were reading specialists. She was unfamiliar with the term. (The representative’s promises about the benefits the two struggling readers would achieve, her lack of knowledge of the two reading approaches, and her unfamiliarity with the term reading specialist, frightened me. I was worried that someone who expressed so little knowledge of reading would make such strong promises for children enrolled in specific programs. I often felt I was speaking to a sales representative who memorized a script.)

The Teachers: The company doesn’t require teachers to have graduate degrees in reading and they are not certified reading specialists. In touting the benefits of the company, the representative mentioned that although the teachers lacked graduate degrees in reading, they’re specialists in reading because the company trains them. Moreover, many are professors in the company. (I interpreted her comment as saying that graduate degrees in reading were unnecessary. Because I’ve coordinated a graduate program in reading disabilities, edited an academic journal in reading and writing difficulties, I found the lack of graduate degrees in reading troublesome in a program that would diagnose the reading needs of poor readers and claimed it would turn them into good readers. I also wondered what it meant to be a professor for a private company. Could any company call its employees professors, even if they lacked graduate degrees in the area of expertise?)

The representative also said that for 40 years the company has worked with universities to deliver the company’s programs. I found appalling both the University’s letter and the possibility that this company has a long history of working with universities to deliver programs like the one I was learning about. The University’s letter never mentioned explicitly that the Center in the letter was a private company, the “professional instructors” were not University faculty but employees of the Center, that the Center was not a University center. In this sense, I thought the University’s letter deceptive. That a university would use its name and letterhead to endorse something like these 10-hour programs, which I viewed as potentially destructive to many “poor readers” and their parents, needs to be investigated, and if my opinions are correct, stopped.

To start the process, I sent an e-mail to the high-ranking official who made the promises I quoted. Below are excerpts. I was upset that a great university might endorse what I thought was an emaciated program(s) that could harm poor readers and their parents, parents who might spend nearly their last dollar and all their hope on a university-endorsed program. As you’ll see, I did not identify the University (or the company) in this post as I wanted to give the University a few days to evaluate and quickly rectify the situation. And it needs to quickly rectify the situation as many parents of “poor readers” begin their desperate search for summer reading programs in May and June.

MY LETTER

Re: Undated Letter entitled “Reading Skills and Speed Reading Programs for Children and Adults”

Dear Dr. ____________:

I just reviewed the above entitled letter that was mailed on your Unknown University letterhead and was apparently signed by you…. For example, the letter categorically states that the five week program “will turn poor readers into good readers.” Promises like this, scattered throughout the letter, violate many of the ethics of [names of three professional organizations] . The reasons are straight forward: It often takes years of daily tutoring to “turn poor readers into good readers” and results can disappoint; thus, results cannot be guaranteed. (A phone conversation with the XYZ-Learning-Center’s [a fictitious name] representative indicated that classes can have up to 20-students, each class has one teacher, the teachers [are not required to] have graduate degrees in reading, the entire program is 10-hours over 5 weeks….).

…. If you think my conclusions are unjustified, please check with the professors in your Literacy [programs] about the likelihood that the advertised program will turn poor readers into good ones. Clearly, this and many similar promises in the letter disturb me.

[You have my suggestions to remedy the promises in your letter.]  By Tuesday, please let me know, in writing, what you will do to quickly rectify the situation…. Tuesday should be adequate time for your office to investigate the veracity of my allegations; through troublesome, conceptually they are simple.

Thank you for your attention to this unusual matter.

THE LESSON: BEWARE

For parents of “poor readers” (and parents of children with other disabilities), I have a simple, straightforward opinion about getting help for your children: Beware. Some people with impressive titles will promise you quick fixes. They may or may not know better. But quick fixes will not help “poor readers” (and children with other disabilities). If quick fixes could, schools would quickly eliminate most reading problems.

However, teachers and reading specialists who are knowledgeable and skilled can often help greatly. Often, they can eliminate or minimize reading problems and strengthen children’s confidence, resiliency, and mental well-being. This takes dedication, knowledge, good diagnoses, frequent monitoring, and attention to children’s emotional and social needs as well as their academic needs. It takes considerable time and resources. In addition to hard work by your child’s teachers and reading specialists, it takes hard work by you and your child. So beware of promises that sound too good to be true, even if made by high-ranking officials at universities with prestigious names.

TWO POSTSCRIPTS

Shortly after writing this post, I did a quick Google search, using the phrase “turn poor readers into good readers.” I was shocked and saddened that so many universities used this phrase to advertise the XYZ-Learning-Center’s program. Some used essentially the same letter to advertise the reading program(s). So, again my simple opinion: BEWARE of universities that promise far more than they or their partners can likely deliver.

The high ranking university official responded to my e-mail. S/he would take no action; instead, s/he praised the program, saying the University had run it for eight years, it had a better than 90% approval rate, it does not “serve classified students or other students with learning disabilities,” and the University’s “faculty review the program  evaluations and the instructor training program…. [It] is much more than simply a profit-making joint venture.” I have problems with his/her statements. For example, the Center representative failed to ask me about special education classification or learning disabilities, despite the fact that I told her the two [mythical] children for whom I was inquiring were struggling with reading and read “well below grade level.” The University’s advertisement speaks for itself; it promises to make poor readers into good ones; it does not say the programs are inappropriate for children with learning disabilities. Poor reading is arguably the most common reason for classifying children as having learning disabilities. These are but a few of my concerns. I suspect that the saga will continue.

HM © Reading2008 & Beyond

www.reading2008.com

***************************************************************************************************************************************

A Note on Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds (www.reading2008.com)

Psychology Today.com recently wrote that Reading Disabilities: Beating the Odds was one of the three “best books about education published in 2010. Recommend [it] to your friends.” On our blog, an English teacher wrote that Beating the Odds “is one of the best books, if not the best book on education published this year.” A Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism called it “a great book.” A parent wrote, “Your Reading Disabilities book is by far the best resource I have found regarding the IEP and IDEA and providing understandable and concrete suggestions and implementation strategies.” Another wrote, your book is “fascinating and effective.” On Amazon, a professor of special education called it “a fantastic resource… well-written, practical… an essential guide.” The Kansas City Examiner.com cited our blog as one of the ten best special needs blogs of 2010. We thank these and many other reviewers for their kind words.

And we hope that our book and blog helps lots of children, parents, teachers, IEP Team members, and schools. It’s why we keep plugging away. – HM & GB