<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hopes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://teacheffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://TeachEffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/</link>
	<description>Evidence-based teaching methods for helping students who are at risk for school failure or who have disabilities.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 06:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: JohnL</title>
		<link>http://TeachEffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-58414</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnl.edschool.virginia.edu/blogs/TeachEffectively/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-58414</guid>
		<description>Kathy, I also found those materials saddening. So much hope, so little sense. I agree about the value of experience. I also think it's valuable to know why, for example, comb has a "b" on he end. I also think that there is another extremely important feature to teaching reading: The teaching itself, scaffolding (as we now say; remember when it as "prompts?"), providing practice, etc. 

Thanks for the comment. I'm glad to have your contributions here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kathy, I also found those materials saddening. So much hope, so little sense. I agree about the value of experience. I also think it&#8217;s valuable to know why, for example, comb has a &#8220;b&#8221; on he end. I also think that there is another extremely important feature to teaching reading: The teaching itself, scaffolding (as we now say; remember when it as &#8220;prompts?&#8221;), providing practice, etc. </p>
<p>Thanks for the comment. I&#8217;m glad to have your contributions here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy  Rollheiser</title>
		<link>http://TeachEffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-58301</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy  Rollheiser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:05:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnl.edschool.virginia.edu/blogs/TeachEffectively/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-58301</guid>
		<description>I glanced through the documents from the university you mentioned John, and had a sinking heart. As much as I would like to believe that there is substance under those generic descriptors, I have met too many recent grads that are themselves frustrated by their lack of practical knowledge.
  
Besides the Famous Five Components, I also think a teacher needs to have a good grasp on linguistics and on the history of the English language. I have read a couple of books on the origin of the language, and took linguistics in university. I use it in my attempts to explain some of our idiosyncrasies and down right bizarre rules. My students are grateful for the attempt to explain what has been such a mystery to them, and we are all amused by it.
  
I applaud this young woman's bravery and her convictions, I can't help but think that in order to be an effective teacher of students with severe challenges in reading,  some time in the trenches is necessary. While I don't know her age, her experience is limited to teaching  grade 1 if I understand that correctly. I taught for 18 years before getting my Masters degree, and I felt lucky to have those years to draw on during the course of my studies. I think one needs to see alot of children reading to be able to know what normal looks like, and to recognize real trouble when one sees it. (not 18 years perhaps, but a span of time)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I glanced through the documents from the university you mentioned John, and had a sinking heart. As much as I would like to believe that there is substance under those generic descriptors, I have met too many recent grads that are themselves frustrated by their lack of practical knowledge.</p>
<p>Besides the Famous Five Components, I also think a teacher needs to have a good grasp on linguistics and on the history of the English language. I have read a couple of books on the origin of the language, and took linguistics in university. I use it in my attempts to explain some of our idiosyncrasies and down right bizarre rules. My students are grateful for the attempt to explain what has been such a mystery to them, and we are all amused by it.</p>
<p>I applaud this young woman&#8217;s bravery and her convictions, I can&#8217;t help but think that in order to be an effective teacher of students with severe challenges in reading,  some time in the trenches is necessary. While I don&#8217;t know her age, her experience is limited to teaching  grade 1 if I understand that correctly. I taught for 18 years before getting my Masters degree, and I felt lucky to have those years to draw on during the course of my studies. I think one needs to see alot of children reading to be able to know what normal looks like, and to recognize real trouble when one sees it. (not 18 years perhaps, but a span of time)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnL</title>
		<link>http://TeachEffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-5667</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2006 00:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnl.edschool.virginia.edu/blogs/TeachEffectively/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-5667</guid>
		<description>Ken, your thoughts are likely to be right about this. Even experienced teachers who understand the Famous Five Components (FFC; ~&#8482; or ~©) would likely be more effective if they used an evidence-validated, coherent curriculum than they would be if the rolled their own. But, that's a dang good empirical question. We're planning to pose it for research funding in a future project.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken, your thoughts are likely to be right about this. Even experienced teachers who understand the Famous Five Components (FFC; ~&trade; or ~©) would likely be more effective if they used an evidence-validated, coherent curriculum than they would be if the rolled their own. But, that&#8217;s a dang good empirical question. We&#8217;re planning to pose it for research funding in a future project.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kderosa</title>
		<link>http://TeachEffectively.com/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-5666</link>
		<dc:creator>kderosa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 17:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnl.edschool.virginia.edu/blogs/TeachEffectively/2006/08/28/hopes/#comment-5666</guid>
		<description>In the absence of a evidence-validated commercial curriculum, I would not have high hopes that Ms. Sadowski will be able to piece togaether a coherent curriculum based on what she learned at Depaul.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the absence of a evidence-validated commercial curriculum, I would not have high hopes that Ms. Sadowski will be able to piece togaether a coherent curriculum based on what she learned at Depaul.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
