The U. S. Department of Education recently released a report analyzing the impact and effectiveness of the federally funded Reading First programs at the heart of No Child Left Behind law. The report found that students enrolled in this $6 million dollar federal reading programs, are not reading or comprehending any better than those who attended schools that did not receive program money.
Specifically, the study finds Reading First has had no significant impact, even though students are spending increased class time working directly on the reading skills the program promotes (i.e., phonics, fluency, and comprehension). And, though there was some improvement in comprehension for first and second graders who entered the study a little later, that improvement disappeared in grade three.
The Washington Post quoted Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst, director of the Institute of Education Sciences, the Education Department’s research arm, said in a briefing with reporters:
“It’s possible that, in implementing Reading First, there is a greater emphasis on decoding skills and not enough emphasis, or maybe not correctly structured emphasis, on reading comprehension,” he said. “It’s one possibility.”
Whitehurst said there are other possible explanations. One, he said, is that the program “doesn’t end up helping children read.” He said the program’s approach could be effective in helping students learn building-block skills yet not “take children far enough along to have a significant impact on comprehension.”
As you can imagine, this news rocked the sessions and the hallways this week at the International Reading Association conference in Atlanta. The Association officially responded to the report in this way:
"the latest data on Reading First should be seen for what they are – a call to look closely at what is taking place in our schools and how we can support our children and our teachers. We need to work together to develop policies in an open and transparent environment that will result in improvements in reading instruction and achievement.
The International Reading Association is calling for resources and support to schools and school districts for:
- long-term professional development of teachers that is based on both evidence and experience
- the expansion of links between schools and colleges
- district flexibility to meet the increasing needs of ELL students, struggling readers and other who need reading instruction tailored for their needs and circumstatnces
- support of middle and high school reading instruction that takes the promise of elementary school reading instructions and build on its success
- the use of a range of assessments that provides information to improve instruction
Whether friend or foe, we can logically conclude that improving reading will require more than just implementing a checklist of isolated components prepackaged in a pretty box or fancy three ring binder. My hope is that this study and all the hoopla to come will ignite the necessary dialogue between educators and the legislature. We must move the conversation beyond "Programs" and investing time and money in the training and support necessary for teachers and schools to comprehensively improve literacy for ALL students.
What do you think? What has been your experience with Reading First? Our voices matter, now more than ever. While the fire is hot…let’s stoke the flame!
