They build up to learning large words. Struggling readers need decoding skills to achieve reading success. How quickly they go through the program depends on their success. Students must master the current level before moving on. The term structured literacy encompasses reading programs that focus on decoding words in a systematic approach.
Many variations of structured literacy programs are available today. Anyone having difficulties learning how to decode words and develop reading comprehension skills needs a structured literacy program. In addition to the Orton-Gillingham Method, consider these other structured reading programs :.
Most structured literacy programs provide specific recommendations on how quickly to intervene on behalf of struggling readers. Many experts recommend starting as early as Kindergarten. The programs also indicate lesson length and focus, and how many students can be accommodated in an instructional group. Finally, teachers need training in the system chosen. Most struggling readers diagnosed with dyslexia or dyslexia-like symptoms can learn to read when taught with a structured literacy approach.
Teachers need the tools to diagnose reading challenges in their students and intervene early. Special Student Populations. Subject Areas. Financial Compliance. State Funding. Texas Permanent School Fund. Data Submission. Educator Data. Financial Reports.
Legislative Information. Program Evaluations. School Data. School Performance. Student Data. Assessment Initiatives. Educator Evaluation and Support System. Educator Initiatives. Reading Recovery, the 1st grade intervention used by about 20 percent of teachers surveyed, was developed in the s by New Zealand researcher Marie Clay.
Thirty-minute lessons are delivered one-on-one, and generally follow a similar structure day to day. The idea is to catch students early before they need more intensive intervention, said Jeff Williams, a Reading Recovery Teacher-Leader in the Solon school district in Ohio. During the rest of the lesson, students practice letter-sound relationships, write a short story, and assemble words in a cut-up story. At the end, they read a new book.
The program also requires intensive teacher training, which is administered through partner colleges. In both programs, text is leveled according to perceived difficulty.
Teachers are told to match students to books at a just-right level, with the idea that this will challenge but not overwhelm them. Students in the lowest levels read predictable text: books in which the sentence structure is similar from page to page, and pictures present literal interpretations of what the text says.
One LLI book, for example, follows a girl as she gets dressed to go sledding in winter. The company also declined to comment. The main point of disagreement concerns these predictable texts and the teaching methods that align to them. For Williams, the Reading Recovery teacher leader in Ohio, predictable text can be a useful orienting tool when children are still learning how print works.
The repetitive sentence structure demonstrates that words have consistent meaning, and the frequent pictures provide a context to link to the words, he said.
But other experts say using predictable text this way teaches young children the wrong understanding of how the English language works.
Instead, they decode the letter-sound correspondences. After several exposures, the word becomes recognizable on sight, through a process called orthographic mapping. Of course, a picture of a hippopotamus can convey useful information. It could help a child understand what the animal looks like, or what it might do in the wild. Both have daily sections for letter and word work. But basing instruction around individual student errors—rather than progressing through a systematic structure—can leave some gaps, said Kristen Koeller, the educator outreach manager at Decoding Dyslexia California, who used to be a Reading Recovery teacher.
Phonics does happen in Reading Recovery lessons, she said. LLI does include a scope and sequence for phonemic awareness and phonics instruction. Kindergartners and 1st graders in the treatment group did better than the control group on some subtests, but 2nd graders saw no difference.
Reading Recovery, by contrast, has a much stronger evidence base for effectiveness. But even that study has invited controversy. Psychologists James W. Chapman and William E. Tunmer published a critique of the evaluation , arguing that many of the lowest-achieving students were excluded from the program, potentially inflating success rates.
The executive director of the Reading Recovery Council of North America did not respond to requests for comment. Three core instructional programs also made the top five most popular list among teachers, according to the Education Week survey: The Units of Study for Teaching Reading, by Heinemann, and Journeys and Into Reading, both by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
What is the life that a good reader leads? Calkins declined an interview for this story through her publisher, Heinemann. The company also declined to comment on the program itself. Units of Study instills these reading habits in children, and teaches them that reading is something to value, said Susan Chambre, an assistant professor of education at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, N.
It also introduces a variety of genres and gives students choice in what they read. But Chambre struggled with Units of Study when she used it as a kindergarten teacher in an inclusion classroom. Chambre would watch children mumble through sentences, making up words by looking at the pictures.
0コメント