then ich dreading research program
TRANSCRIPT
From the Laboratory to Congress, to the White House to the Classroom.
The NICHD Reading Research Program and the
Birth of Evidence-Based Reading Instruction
Reading4all @ tx.rr.com
G. Reid Lyon, Ph.D. Department of Education Policy and Leadership Southern Methodist University Distinguished Scholar in Neuroscience and Cognition Center for Brain Health University of Texas, Dallas President of Synergistic Education Solutions
www.ReidLyon.com
The Profession Through the Ages “The history of the profession has never been a particularly
attractive subject in professional education, and one reason for
this is that it is so deplorable a story.
For century after century all the way into the remote millennia
of its origins, the profession got along by sheer guesswork and
the crudest sort of empiricism. It is hard to conceive of a less
scientific enterprise among human endeavors.”
Virtually anything that could be thought up for treatment was tried out at one time or another, and once tried, lasted decades or even centuries before giving it up.
It was, in retrospect, the most frivolous and irresponsible kind of human experimentation, based on nothing but trial and error, and usually resulting in precisely that sequence.”
Lewis Thomas (1983)
The Profession through the Age (Cont.)
Alternatives To Research-Based Instruction
ANECDOTES
UNTESTED BELIEFS ABOUT TEACHING AND LEARNING
FADS, QUICK FIXES, AND APPEALS TO AUTHORITY
STUDENT FAILURE
2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress
2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress
20
Grade 4 Overall Reading/English Language Arts Performance Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (English language)
and NAEP (NCES, 2007)
2007 NAEP Proficient and Above
2007 NAEP Basic and Above
DOES IT HAVE TO BE THIS WAY?
NO!
We now know enough about Reading
Development and Reading Difficulties and
Reading Instruction to Significantly Decrease
Reading Failure!
THE NICHD READING RESEARCH PROGRAM: RESEARCH DIRECTORS (1963- )
James Kavanaugh
NO PIX
D. Grey R. Lyon P. McCardle B. Miller
The NICHD Reading Research Program (1992)
The NICHD Reading Research Program initiated in 1963
A Commitment to Focus on Four Research Questions (Reid’s Questions):
• How Do Children Learn to Read?
• Why Do Some Children Have Difficulties Learning To Read?
• How Can Reading Failure Be Prevented?
• How Can Persistent Reading Difficulties be Remediated?
THE NICHD SCIENTIFIC INVESTMENT Number of Research Sites: 44 Children and Adults Studied: 57,000 Proficient Readers: 22,000 At-Risk/Struggling Readers 35,000 Average Years Studied/Followed: 9 Max Longitudinal Span to Date: 34 years Current Prevention/Intervention Trials 12 Schools Currently Participating: 266 Classrooms Currently Participating: 985 Classroom Teachers Participating: 1,012
Annual Research Budget: $ 60 Million
NIH-NICHD Multidisciplinary Research Program
(North America; Lyon, 1985-2005)
NICHD Sites
U of Arkansas – Med Ctr Dykman
U of Missouri Geary
Colorado LDRC Defries
U of Michigan Morrison
Toronto Lovett
U of Louisville Molfese
Mayo Clinic Kalusic
Boy’s Town Smith
U of Houston Francis
SUNY Albany Vellutino
U of California – San Diego, Salk Institute Bellugi
U of Texas – Med Ctr Foorman/Fletcher
Yale Methodology Fletcher
Emerson College Aram
Tufts Wolf
Syracuse U Blachman
U of Massachusetts
Rayner
Beth Israel Galaburda
Children’s Hospital/ Harvard LDRC Waber
Florida State Torgesen/Wagner
U of Washington Berninger
Stanford Reiss
U of Southern California Manis/Seidenberg
Univ of California – Irvine Filipek
Bowman Gray Wood
Georgetown U Eden
D.C./Houston Forman/Moats
Johns Hopkins Denckla
Haskins Labs Fowler/ Liberman
Yale Shaywitz
Purdue U Hynd
Univ of Florida Alexander/Conway
Georgia State R. Morris
San Francisco Herron
U of Kansas Shumaker
U of Wisconsin Johnson-Glenburg
Northwestern U Booth
Gallaudet U LaSasso
Duke U Goldston
U of Georgia Stahl
Colorado Moats
U of Texas Vaughn
Rutgers U Scarboro-ugh
Carnegie-Mellon
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
The Science
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
Americans are overwhelmingly interested in science but
don’t understand it and know even less about how it is
done. … Without a grasp of scientific ways of thinking,
the average person cannot tell the difference between
science based on real data and something that
resembles science -- at least in their eyes -- but is based
on uncontrolled experiments, anecdotal evidence, and
passionate assertions. They like it all. Boyce Rensberger, “The Nature of Evidence”, Science, July 7, 2000, p. 61
How Do Children Learn To Read?
Phonological Awareness and The Alphabetic Principle
• Print represents speech through the alphabet
• Words are composed of internal units based on sound called “phonemes”
• In learning to read, children must make explicit an implicit understanding that words have internal structures linked to sounds
• Children vary considerably in how easily they master this principle
THE HASKINS GROUP Al Liberman Isabelle Liberman I. Mattingly D.Shankweiler M. Studdert-Kennedy
C. Fowler K. Pugh M. Turvey H. Scarborough S. Brady
P. Rubin R. Frost L. Katz E. Mencl M. Gillis
THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO GROUP
J. DeFries R. Olson S. Smith B. Wise
B. Pennington B. Byrne
Marilyn Adams
The Alphabetic Principle:
Do We Know It?
Can We Teach It?
It is a kind of knowledge Knowing what letters are used to represent which phonemes…….
It is a kind of skill know how to pronounce this nonsense word. . . bilt fratchet
How Do Children Learn to Read? Effects of growth in Phoneme Awareness and Letter
Knowledge
Growth in word reading ability
of children who begin 1st grade in the bottom 20% in Growth in “phonics” ability
1 2 3 4 5
2.3
Grade Level Corresponding to Age
Rea
ding
Gra
de L
evel
Average
2
4
6
1
3
5
K
5.9
Averagee
Low
5.7
3.5
2
4
6
1
3
5
K 1 2 3 4
Grade Level Corresponding to Age
5
Torgesen & Mathes, 2000
7 7
Low Average
Rea
ding
Gra
de L
evel
Average
Low
2
4
6
1
3
5
6.9
3.4
K 1 2 3 4
Grade Level Corresponding to Age
5
Torgesen & Mathes, 2000
Effects of Phonemic Awareness and Phonics on Growth in Reading Comprehension 7
THE FLORIDA STATE GROUP
J. Torgesen B. Foorman R. Wagner C. Schatschneider
C. Lonnigan P. Mathes
Reading Fluency
Reading fluency encompasses the speed or rate of reading, as well as the ability to read materials with expression.
The ability to read connected text rapidly, smoothly, effortlessly, and automatically with little conscious attention to the mechanics of reading, such as decoding
The concept of automaticity refers to a student's ability to recognize words rapidly with little attention required to the word's appearance. The ability to read words by sight automatically is the key to skilled reading
Reading Fluency
Its very difficult to correctly guess the identity of these “new words” from the context of the passage.
Torgesen
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
The challenge of continuing growth in fluency becomes even greater after 3rd grade.
4th, 5th, and 6th graders encounter about 10,000 words they have never seen before in print during a year’s worth of reading.
Furthermore, each of these “new” words occurs only about 10 times in a year’s worth of reading.
R. Morris M. Lovett M. Wolf
THE GEORGIA STATE/U. TORONTO/TUFTS GROUP
Marilyn Adams
• Probability of Limited Language Usage in the Home
• Probability of Limited Literacy Interactions in the Home
• Probability of Limited Vocabulary Development
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
THE AGONY OF DISADVANTAGE
Average child from a welfare family hears about 3 million words a year vs. 11 million from a professional family (Hart & Risley, 1995).
By age 4, the gap in words heard grows to 13 vs. 45 million
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
Differences in vocabulary development start very early
Cumulative Language Experiences
Cumulative Words Spoken to Child (in millions)
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 12 24 36 48
Age of Child (in months)
Professional
Working-class
Welfare
48
30
12 12
7.5 3
Hart and Risley, 1995
Practical Differences
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
Children enter school with a listening vocabulary ranging between 2500 to 5000.
First graders from higher SES groups know twice as many words as lower SES children (Graves & Slater, 1987)
Vocabulary differences at grade 2 may last throughout elementary school (Biemiller & Slonim, in press)
College entrants need about 11 to 14,000 root words (meter in thermometer or centimeter)
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
Reading Age Level
Chronological Age
Low Oral Language in Kindergarten
High Oral Language in Kindergarten
Hirsch, 1996
The Effects of Weaknesses in Oral Language on Reading Growth
5.2 years difference
• In 1st and 2nd grade, children need to learn 800+ words per year, about 2 per day
• Children need to learn 2,000 to 3,000 new words each year from 3rd grade onward, about 6–8 per day.
• Research has shown that most typically developing children need to encounter a word about 12 times before they know it well enough to improve their comprehension.
• 4th, 5th, and 6th graders encounter about 10,000 words they have never seen before in print during a year’s worth of reading. Biemiller; Nagy & Anderson
Closing the Gap? Gut Check Time
G. Berninger R. Abbott W. Raskind T. Richards
D. Corina E. Aylward
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON GROUP
Are you Really Serious About Closing Achievement Gaps?
Independent Reading: Minutes Per Day Words Read Per Year
65.0 4,358,000 21.1 1,823,000 14.2 1,146,000 9.6 622,000 4.6 282,000 1.3 106,000 .1 8,000
Cunningham & Stanovich, 1999
The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Poorer
Reading is a multifaceted skill, gradually acquired over years of instruction and practice.
The Many Strands that are Woven into Skilled Reading (Scarborough, 2001)
BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE
VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE
LANGUAGE STRUCTURES
VERBAL REASONING
LITERACY KNOWLEDGE
PHON. AWARENESS
DECODING (and SPELLING)
SIGHT RECOGNITION
LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION
WORD RECOGNITION
Skilled Reading- fluent coordination of word
reading and comprehension
processes
ALWAYS REMEMBER THIS:
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
G. Berninger R. Abbott W. Raskind T. Richards
D. Corina E. Aylward
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON GROUP
THE FLORIDA STATE GROUP
J. Torgesen B. Foorman R. Wagner C. Schatschneider
C. Lonnigan P. Mathes
INTERVENTION
Early Intervention is Possible
Risk characteristics present in Kindergarten & G1
Letter sound knowledge, phonological awareness, oral language development
Assess all children and INTERVENE- first in the classroom and then through supplemental instruction
Panagio's G. Simos, Ph.D.
B. Foorman J. Fletcher D. Francis K. Steubing
L. Moats A. Papanicalaou P. Mathes
The U. Texas Health Science Center/Houston Group
HOW CAN WE PREVENT READING FAILURE?
• Development of Sensitive and Valid Screening Measures
• Professional Development and Use of a Professional Common Language
• Implementation of Three-Tier Models
• Continuous Assessment of Progress
• Appreciation of School Leadership and Capacity Factors
THE FLORIDA STATE GROUP
J. Torgesen B. Foorman R. Wagner C. Schatschneider
C. Lonnigan P. Mathes
Study Amt. of instruction Pre RX Post RX
Foorman 174 hrs.- classroom 35% 6%
Felton 340 hrs. - groups of 8 32% 5%
Vellutino 35- 65 hrs. 1:1 tutoring 46% 7%
Torgesen 88 hrs. 1:1 tutoring 30% 4%
Torgesen 80 hrs. 1:3 tutoring 11% 2%
NICHD INTERVENTION STUDIES
Percent of children scoring below the 30th percentile
Torgesen 91 hrs. 1:3 or 1:5 tutoring 28% 1.6%
Mathes 80 hrs. 1:3 tutoring 31% .02%
Panagio's G. Simos, Ph.D.
B. Foorman J. Fletcher D. Francis K. Steubing
L. Moats A. Papanicalaou P. Mathes
The U. Texas Health Science Center/Houston Group
THE FLORIDA STATE GROUP
J. Torgesen B. Foorman R. Wagner C. Schatschneider
C. Lonnigan P. Mathes
R. Morris M. Lovett M. Wolf
THE GEORGIA STATE/U. TORONTO/TUFTS GROUP
THE SUNY-ALBANY GROUP
F. Vellutino D. Scanlon
F. Wood R. Felton L. Flowers G. Eden
The Bowman Gray – Wake Forest Group
THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO GROUP
J. DeFries R. Olson S. Smith B. Wise
B. Pennington B. Byrne
The consensus view of the most important instructional features for interventions
Provide ample opportunities for guided practice of new skills
Provide a significant increase in intensity of instruction
Provide systematic and explicit instruction on component skills that are deficient
Interventions are more effective when they:
Provide appropriate levels of scaffolding as children learn to apply new skills
Are we Really Serious About Closing Achievement Gaps?
NEUROBIOLOGY
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
A. Galaburda Hortense G. Sherman
THE HARVARD-BETH ISRAEL GROUP
THE YALE GROUP S. Shaywitz B. Shaywitz R. Fulbright J. Gore
A. Liberman D. Shankweiler Jack Fletcher K. Pugh
E. Mencl L. Katz R. Morris B. Blachman
R! L!
1! 1!
2!
3!
4!5!
6!
7!
One Year After Intervention
Shaywitz et al., Biol. Psychiatry, 2004
Z=+12
Z=-4
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." -Anonymous
NI DYS NI > DYS R L Nonword Reading
Shaywitz, B.A., et al 2002 Shaywitz et al., 2004.
\
NICHD Perspective
Panagio's G. Simos, Ph.D.
B. Foorman J. Fletcher D. Francis K. Steubing
L. Moats A. Papanicalaou P. Mathes
The U. Texas Health Science Center/Houston Group
Source: Simos, Fletcher et al., 2002. Fig 1.
• L R L R • Before After
Magnetic Source Imaging (MSI)
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
THE GEORGETOWN GROUP
NICHD Perspective
G. Eden C. Vaidya C. LaSasso F. Wood
L. Flowers B.Fischl P.Turkeltaub
Changes in brain activity following reading intervention in adults with developmental dyslexia
(Eden et al., Neuron, 2004)
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
G. Berninger R. Abbott W. Raskind T. Richards
D. Corina E. Aylward
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON GROUP
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
THE JOHNS HOPKINS GROUP
M. Denckla A. Reiss L. Cutting
K. Pugh H. Scarborough D. Speece
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
The University of Louisville Group
D. Molfese V. Molfese
GENETICS
Genetic Factors in Reading Disability
Sites on chromosomes 1, 2, 6, 15, -6 and 15 replicated in 3- 5 labs
Little evidence for genes specific to poor reading- “generalist genes”
50- 80% of the variability explained by genetic factors
THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO GROUP
J. DeFries R. Olson S. Smith B. Wise
B. Pennington B. Byrne
G. Berninger R. Abbott W. Raskind T. Richards
D. Corina E. Aylward
THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON GROUP
F. Wood R. Felton L. Flowers G. Eden
The Bowman Gray – Wake Forest Group
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
SCIENCE, POLICY, AND POLITICS
“Things are only impossible until they're not ”
--Jean-Luc Picard
“Courage is the power to let go of the familiar”
--Raymond Lindquist
W. Goodling B. Clinton E. Kennedy A. Northup THE FEDS
T. Cochran R. Sweet L. Bush-R. Lyon POTUS-R. Lyon
↔ NIH “ I am so tired of the #!₡**)# metro “ ↔ Congress
↕ ↔The White House ↨ ↨ ↔ HHS ↨ ↔ Dept. Of Ed ↕
Reid’s Daily Rounds – 2002-2005
Three Congressional Questions
In 1996, Bill Goodling, Chairman of the House Education and Work Force Committee Asked Reid Three Questions:
1. Why Are So Many Kids Not Learning To Read?
2. Does NICHD Have Any Answers?
3. How Can We Help These Kids Learn to Read?
RESPONSE TO QUESTION # 1
“Why Are So Many Kids Not Learning To Read”?
WHY?
“Education did not typically base curricular and instructional practices on scientific research.
If research information was used it was communicated in a manner that frequently confused the educational consumer
Neither school administrators nor teachers had been prepared in their training to be knowledgeable consumers of research and to distinguish between the bad and the good” Lyon, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005).
I
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
Alternatives To Research-Based Instruction
ANECDOTES
UNTESTED BELIEFS ABOUT TEACHING AND LEARNING
FADS, QUICK FIXES, AND APPEALS TO AUTHORITY
STUDENT FAILURE
House Testimony (Cont.) (Lyon, 1997)
“A major impediment to serving the needs of children demonstra7ng difficul7es learning to read is current teacher prepara7on prac7ces. Many teachers lack basic knowledge and understanding of reading
development and the nature of reading difficul7es. Major efforts should be undertaken to ensure that colleges of educa7on possess the exper7se and
commitment to foster exper7se in teachers at both persevere and in service levels”.
EDUCATION AS ANTI-SCIENCE • The Influence of Postmodernism – “Truth is in the Eye
of the Beholder”
• Cause and Effect Principles do not Exist
• Scientific Methods to Determine Cause and Effect were Useless
• Many Colleges of Education Remain Wedded to Anti-Scientific Perspectives
• Experience Valued Above Use of Scientific Research
UNEVEN QUALITY OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
From Levine (2005, 2006)
• SUPERFICIAL • LACKING IN RIGOR • EMPHASIZES BREADTH OVER DEPTH • BASED ON IDEOLOGY RATHER THAN
SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES • INACCURATE (WRONG DESIGN AND
METHODS)
RESPONSE TO QUESTION # 2
Does NICHD Have Any Answers?
Testimony Before The House of Representatives Education and Work Force Committee, (Lyon, 1997)
“We have learned that for 90% to 95% of poor readers, prevention and early intervention programs that combine instruction in phoneme awareness, phonics, and reading comprehension strategies provided by well trained teachers can increase reading skills to average reading levels. However, we have also learned that if we delay early intervention until nine-years-of-age, (the time that most children with reading difficulties receive services), approximately 75% of the children will continue to have difficulties learning to read throughout high school”.
Testimony Before The House of Representatives Education and Work Force Committee, (Lyon, 1997)
“Learning to read is a lengthy and difficult process for many children, and success in learning to read is based
in large part on developing language and literacy-related skills very early in life. A massive effort needs to be undertaken to inform parents, and the educational
and medical communities of the need to involve children in reading from the first days of life …Parents
must become intimately aware of the importance of vocabulary development and the use of verbal
interactions with their youngsters to enhance grammar, syntax, and verbal reasoning”.
House Testimony (Cont.) (Lyon, 1997)
“… reading programs should be constructed to ensure that adequate instruc7onal 7me be alloDed to the teaching of phonemic awareness skills, phonics skills, the development of reading fluency and automa7city, and the development of reading comprehension strategies. All of these components of reading are necessary but not sufficient in and of themselves. For children demonstra7ng difficulty in learning to read, it is impera7ve that each of these components be taught within an integrated context and that ample prac7ce in reading familiar material be afforded”.
House Testimony (Cont.) (Lyon, 1997)
“Kindergarten programs should be designed so that all children will develop the prerequisite
phonological, vocabulary, and early reading skills necessary for success in the first grade. All children should acquire the ability to recognize and print both upper and lowercase leDers with reasonable ease and accuracy, develop familiarity with the basic purposes and mechanisms of reading and wri7ng, and develop age‐appropriate language”.
RESPONSE TO QUESTION # 3
“How Can We Help These Kids Learn to Read”?
In order to develop the most effective instructional approaches and interventions, we must clearly define what works, the conditions under which it works, and what may not be helpful. This requires a thoughtful integration of experimental, quasi-experimental and qualitative/descriptive methodologies…
Reid Lyon, Chief, Child Development and Behavior Branch, NICHD, Congressional Testimony House Science Committee, Subcommittee on Basic Research, Oct. 26, 1999
I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." --Anonymous
NICHD Perspective NICHD Perspective
House Testimony (Cont.) (Lyon, 1997)
“Our NICHD preven7on and early interven7on studies in Houston, Texas, Tallahassee, and Albany, and SeaDle, speak to the importance of early iden7fica7on and interven7on with children at‐risk for reading failure. Procedures now exist to iden7fy such children with good accuracy. This informa7on needs to be widely disseminated to schools, teachers, and parents”.
A Congressional Question Following 1997 Testimony
How Can We Ensure That Education Practices and Policies are Based on Scientific Evidence?
WE HAVE TO OVERTURN THE STATUS QUO!
The fundamental core of our strategy was to make Federal funding for educational programs contingent upon documenting that the products, and professional development associated with the products, were based upon scientifically-
based reading research (SBRR).
Elements of the Strategy
Elevate critical importance of reading proficiency (1991-2005)
Stress negative consequences of reading failure (1996-2005) - “Reading Failure is not only an educational problem – it is a public health problem” (1996 - 2005)
Congressional testimony to gain support for SBRR (1997-2005)
Develop Evidence-Based Education Policies
Testimony Before The House of Representatives Education and Work Force Committee, (Lyon, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005)
READING FAILURE IS AN EDUCATIONAL
AND A PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEM!
Reading Proficiency is Critical to Academic Learning and Success in School (Lyon, 1998; 2002, 2003, 2004; Snow, Burns & Griffin,
1998)
The Ability to Read Proficiently is Significantly Related to Quality of Life and Health Outcomes (Lyon, 1997; Lyon & Chhabra, 2004;
Thompson, 2001)
SOME READING FIRST IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS
• Failure to ensure an absence of ideology and to stress the paramount importance of science
• Relatively less emphasis on vocabulary and comprehension than word level skills*
• Overemphasis on “linear” instruction
*Limited vocabulary and comprehensions assessments; V and C both difficult to teach; teachers unfamiliar with teaching word level skills which demanded a significant emphasis in PA, Phonics, and Fluency
SOME READING FIRST IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS
• Unrealistic expectations of time involved in implementation
• Government officials and educators did not understand the lack of state and LEA understanding of SBRR and readiness to implement the program
• Softening of the instructional program selection criteria
• Significant lack of clarity on rules and guidelines for peer review, contractor agreements, and Conflicts of Interest
SOME READING FIRST IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS
• Lack of Transparency
• Failure to ensure an absence of ideology and the to stress the paramount importance of science
• Mismanagement of the Program Evaluation Process (delay of studies, inadequate coverage of evaluation questions, “too little, too late”
SIGNIFICANT LIMITATIONS OF THE RFIS • The Study was underfunded ($35 Mil out of $150 Mil)
• The study examined RF schools and non-RF schools within districts
• Significant within district contamination not accounted for – both RF and non-RF schools implemented same programs, materials, and PD, which increased yearly
• Unrepresentative sample – only 17 LEAs participated in the study resulting in a sample of approximately 2% of the total LEAs funded
LESSONS LEARNED • Collaborate More Effectively With Stakeholders • Clearly Understand the Political Challenges • Recruit Highly Experienced Individuals in Leadership
Roles • Require 1 year Implementation Phase for Program
Initiation (First year devoted to Guidance, Technical Support, PD)
• Establish Very Clear COI Guidelines • Transparency, Transparency, Transparency • Make Sure Critical Program Elements are in Place and
ON TIME!!!
LESSONS LEARNED
• Transparency, Transparency, Transparency
• Make Sure Critical Program Elements are in place and ON TIME!!!
• Make Sure Assessments Do Not Constrain Instruction
• Be Much More Explicit in Requiring “Integrated Instruction” Rather Than Linear Instruction in Reading Components
Congressional, NICHD, and DoED Collaborative Initiatives
• Reading Excellence Act (1998) • NRC Report on Beginning Reading (1998) • National Reading Panel Report (2000) • Reading First legislation (2001) • Partnership for Reading (2001) • What Works Clearing House (2001) • NRC Report on Scientific Research in
Education (2002) • Education Sciences Reform Act - IES (2002)
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he
fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those
cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” Theodor Roosevelt 1910 NICHD Perspective
Moving Forward
Thank you for your attention!
G. Reid Lyon
www.ReidLyon.com