Teach Effectively!

Multiple sources accross Canada have covered a distressing story: Nearly ½ of parents of students with disabilities say they had problems securing special education for their children and nearly ¼ of the parents of students with disabilities in Canada said the needs of their children were not being met, according to a survey called “Participation and Activity Limitation Survey” (PALS) conducted in 2006. Overall the report shows that children with disabilities are served well, regardless of variations in type of education provided (full inclusion, part-time special education, or full-time special education) and students’ levels of severity.

As in most other developed countries, Canadian schools are required by law to provide “free and appropriate public education.” Apparently, lots of parents don’t think their children are getting it. To be sure, these are perceptions, but parents’ perceptions are powerful influences on schools’ functioning.
Continue reading ‘Which needs unmet?’

My colleague Dan Willingham has posted a marvelous video that’s an introduction to thinking about neuroscience and education. Under the title “Brain-based Education: Fad or Breakthrough,” he illustrates important elements about what are reasoned extrapolations from cognitive neuroscience to education and what are not.

• D-Ed Reckoning
• Eduwonkette
• Will Talheimers’ Will at Work (an unusually well reasoned commentary on digital learning): Be Skeptical of Brain-Based Learning

Update (7 June 2008): A couple of days ago, Dan posted a new version of the video; I’ve modified the links in the box accordingly.

Shep Barbash published “Looking Beyond the Reading First Controversy” in Education Next, the quarterly journal of the Hoover Institute that examines issues related to US education reform. Although he probably wrote his piece before the recent release of the interim version of the study examining the impact of Reading First, Mr. Barbash makes a spirited argument for the benefits of Reading First. Here’s his lead:

“Reading First is the most effective federal program in history.” So reads the opening line of a report that Alabama superintendent of education Joseph Morton sent to his congressional delegation last June, in which he recounts how the program has raised reading achievement for poor students in his charge. Morton’s view is shared by leaders in many other states, where thousands of Reading First elementary schools have reported unprecedented progress closing the “literacy gap” among the poor.

Continue reading ‘More RF’

Over at Skeptic’s Dictionary Robert Todd Carroll has an extended and detailed analysis of the bologna marketed under the brand name “Brain Gym.” Mr. Carroll, who retired as professor of philosophy in 2007 after teaching taught courses on logic and reasoning, created a Web site (and wrote a book) that covers diverse lunch meats ranging from supernatural, paranormal, and pseudo-scientific. His examination of Brain Gym shows that it falls into the third category of those three…at least, he doesn’t go into any connections between Brain Gym the supernatural or paranormal.
Continue reading ‘Skeptics’ Brain Gym workout’

The UK incarnation of the Reading Reform Foundation provides a glimpse into some of the thinking supporting systematic and synthetic phonics. Here’s clip from it’s home page:

You are entering fascinating territory as these are very exciting times regarding the debate on how best to teach beginning reading in English-speaking countries. English is taught in many countries as an additional language and so people across the world are following this debate with great interest.
Continue reading ‘UK RRF’

Yep, with a little help from friends, I’m about to post Bogus Bowl IV. That means that BB III will soon close. Now, in football one doesn’t get to vote for the winner of Super Bowl I, II, IV, XXVII, MCII, or IIIVMC,; those have been decided. But, it’s late in the 4th quarter for Bogus Bown III; you can still get in your votes on BB III over the next few days. Just click on the link to Teach Effectively Polls. (My vote on this one went for an explanation that is running behind right now.)

Michael F. Shaughnessy has published responses by Reid Lyon, one of the architects of Reading First, to questions about the “Reading First Impact Study: Interim Report” by Beth Gamse and colleagues. Here’s a link to his comments. They are wide-ranging and detailed.
Continue reading ‘Lyon on RF impact study’

The US Institute for Education Sciences released an important report about the effects of Reading First program at the end of April. In the report, “Reading First Impact Study: Interim Report,” Beth C. Gamse and colleagues describe the methods and findings of a study mandated by law to examine the effects of the RF program on instruction in classrooms and outcomes for children attending those schools where it it is implemented.

For those of us who think RF methods represent an improvement over garden-variety reading instruction, the results are disappointing. Although teachers were found to be devoting more time to phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension, students were not experiencing significant improvements in their reading outcomes.

Here’s the executive summary from the report.
Continue reading ‘Weak impact for RF’