di: well-designed reading

[Jeff G]

Unfortunately, I'm not surprised. I just went to one of our district's
"balanced literacy" training sessions where they talked all about the
"science of reading" and used it to falsely support their methodologies.

On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 11:27 AM Carolyn Sharette <csharette at apamail.org>
wrote:

> Crazy happenings in Utah.
> Senate Bill 127 passed requiring state-approved “science-based reading”
> programs in every school within 2 years.
> We cheered!  Finally others would join us in using effective reading
> curriculum!  (We opened 20 years ago and Reading Mastery is our Core
> reading program)
> Every district has to report what program it will use and gain approval to
> qualify under the law.
> We sent in our plan to use Reading Mastery.
> It was FLATLY DENIED.  Too many “red flags”.  Not science-based.
>
> ????????????
>
> State reading results came out.  4 out of top 6 schools use some type of
> Reading Mastery (for Core or Corrective).
>
> Still they refuse to “approve” it!!!!
>
>
> *Carolyn Sharette*
> *Executive Director*
> *Cell: 801-808-3933*
> *csharette at apamail.org <csharette at apamail.org>*
>
>
> [image: 20 year anniversay logo - Email Signature .5x.5.png]
>
> Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail is for
> the intended recipient(s) alone. It may contain privileged and confidential
> information that is legally protected.  If you are not an intended
> recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on
> it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
> immediately by reply to this email and delete the material from your
> computer.
>
> On Oct 6, 2023, at 11:55 AM, Kozloff, Martin <kozloffm at uncw.edu> wrote:
>
> In places where whole language has finally been dropped without  comment
> from districts (which has happened around here), it is because of several
> events.
>
> >> The crisis. Jillions of articles at all levels report the crisis of
> moronitude in public schools. "Jeez, Louise, these kids can't read. What
> the heck!"
>
> >> The challenge. Enough national-level articles (research and commentary)
> are published whose message is that "we finally know what effective
> instruction requires"---even if this has been known for decades.
>
> >> Unmasking the enemy. "Bombshell" reports go after those responsible,
> for their dopey ideas and their fortunes--- stupidity combined with
> avarice. "And the kids paid for this!"
>
> For ex, the Funky Goodmans (an editor of theirs said they were always
> surrounded by a noxious bouquet of stench---they hadn't heard of Whole
> Deodorant.) and Lucy C.
>
> >> The Fear. Administrators start to think that they'd better change
> things or the public may come for them with hot pitch, feathers, and wooden
> rails.
>
> >> Publishers advertise that "We are not those guys. Our materials are
> consistent with what we know works."
>
> >>  The Answer. Administators (having no idea what well-designed
> instruction looks like) buy the materials that are best advertised. Some
> such materials seem to work well enough.
>
> What happens when they pick the wrong materials, as they thrash around for
> a solution? That's when a higher power (state legislature, parents suing
> under the 14 amendment equal protection clause) has to respond swifty,
> before ineffective programs become "Our way."   "No, you need to try again,
> or you'll get sued in federal court."
>
> Just my thoughts. As always, correct, and delivered with humility and a
> side order of schmaltz.
>
> Kozloff out
>
> Check the manuscript if you feel like it. Book 2 of a series of six.
> Integrates DI, ABA, TAGTeach, and  Precision Teaching, in a wholesome
> package of logically okay (I'm not Zig of blessed memory!) formats. Comes
> with a pink tote bag.
> <bk 2 learning readiness.docx>
> _______________________________________________
> di mailing list
> di at lists.uoregon.edu
> https://lists.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/di
>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail is for
> the intended recipient(s) alone. It may contain privileged and confidential
> information that is legally protected.  If you are not an intended
> recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on
> it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
> immediately by reply to this email and delete the material from your
> computer. _______________________________________________
> di mailing list
> di at lists.uoregon.edu
> https://lists.uoregon.edu/mailman/listinfo/di
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uoregon.edu/pipermail/di/attachments/20231012/801914ec/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 20 year anniversay logo - Email Signature .5x.5.png
Type: image/png
Size: 11176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.uoregon.edu/pipermail/di/attachments/20231012/801914ec/attachment-0001.png>