It is interesting that they had to work so hard to try to find a place where SES is not the overwhelming factor in schools success. The could just look at the mountain of evidence that says it IS the overwhwlming determinant but that would be too easy.

Unless we were to have a statistical tie, then by definition some poor schools with have different scores than other poor schools. The important matter is 1) They are still both miles behind the rich schools, 2) The differences are statistically insignificant, 3) Those differences are so small that they are also inconsistant year to year.

There are people from the tobacco industry who still try to prove tobacco is not that bad, but most of us go with the folks who say it is bad.

Greene begins with ideological blinkers on. He does not begin at the point, “I wonder if SES is a major factor?” He begins at ” It is critical to my ongoing argument to prove that SES is not the overarching factor…” Guess what.

Well can you imagine that??

More research that flies in the face of the status-quo rhetoric we’ve all become too used to in Ontario.

This sure gives those poor kids and their families hope rather than an education full of doom, gloom and excuses we hear passed off by quasi-experts these days.

I wonder which philosophy the parents of poor and minority children would prefer to send their kids too?

Isn’t Jay Greene a transplanted Canadian? Sad that he had to go to the USA to find his niche in education reform.

Yes that is the point Mr Sheep, the progressives will say, “We will continue to cut your class size, add the ELP and add to your other resources when we can and the conservative movement can say we will not cut the sizes and will not increase the education budget.

Guess what, in today’s world, not only will the parents support the progressive argument, increasingly the business community is going with the progressive argument just as they support the ELP.

The State Education Department and New York?s teachers? unions have reached a deal to overhaul teacher evaluations and tie them to student test scores, brokering a compromise on an issue the unions had bitterly opposed for years.
Readers’ Comments

  Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

  * Read All Comments (23) ?

The agreement, reached in time for the state?s second bid at $700 million in federal education grants, would scrap the current system whereby teachers were rated simply satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Instead, annual evaluations would place teachers in one of four categories ? highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective. While the deal would not have any immediate effect on teacher pay, it could make it easier for schools to fire teachers deemed subpar.

?We believe that if done correctly this will change the landscape dramatically,? said David M. Steiner, the state education commissioner. ?This is not a gotcha system. This is about creating professional development that can really improve education.?

Teachers would be measured on a 100-point scale, with 20 percent points based on how much students improve on the standardized state exams. Another 20 percent would be based on local tests, which would have to be developed by each school system. After two years, 25 percent would be based on the state exams and 15 percent would come from the local tests.

This would mobilize change-if teacher is not effective-then we get one that is-it would even improve charters.

to translate Doug’s babble

progressives = regression for students, more money and costs for union coffers, fun with numbers and a continued game of who-do-you-trust with your children’s education?

the rest of the world (including liberals, cocktail socialists and conservatives) = doing what’s best for students and providing proof of how public money is being spent to improve achievement.

As someone said earlier let parents decide with their feet as to which they would choose.

“Today’s myth is dubbed “The Myth of Helplessness” - the transformation of difficulties caused by social problems into excuses for inaction. Dr. Greene points out that the plausibility of this myth can easily be tested by looking to see if there are any schools or school districts that have managed to overcome their students’ desperate social problems. If even one school has succeeded with low-income students, then this is proof that school are not helpless in the face of their students’ disadvantages.”

Yes, the myth of helplessness, has reared its ugly head in my household on regular uninvited appearances. My youngest being the bearer of thinking that she is helpless, in the face of her difficulties. The first clue coming from the school, it was expressed that I should not tell my child what was wrong with her, because it would lower her self-esteem. You would not like her to think she is different from other students. Of course I told her, just like I would have told her if she had a disease.

But in that topsy-turvy world of public education, children should pretend to live in a reality, that is much different from their own reality. Of course, she soon learn another lesson from the school of helplessness, it is a handy excuse for doing poorly. Another clue, when the school comes down hard onto a parent, who has higher standards than the school, when it comes to quality and effort. Schools are much more concern with quantity, than the quality and effort put out by the student.

Another lesson that children learn, that the low-income students will be less likely to achieve as high as the students whose parents have higher incomes. Add a learning problem, than they are dumb and poor. The poor child with just one parent, soon learn that the parent is less capable of parenting than the one with two parents. But there is a day, when your child will announce, no matter what income bracket you are in, that parents know nothing, and the school knows everything. It is at this junction, that parents become the dumb ones, and the school is their new guiding light on all things.

Experienced it all, and it takes some undoing and persistence on the parent’s part, to undo the damage.  If left uncorrected, the child grows up thinking they are entitled to things,making more demands from the government to fixed things in their lives, that all the money in the world cannot fix, the human condition.

The easiest way of reducing SES variable, is to provide the children with a solid foundation of the ABCs, the knowledge, and the critical thinking skills, needed to navigate through society, knowing BS when they hear it.

In the face of the overwhelming evidence that even the FI now thinks it need to deal with SES (badly I might add) it amazes me that people still try to deny that this is THE problem.

It is not a reason to do nothing. It is a reason to mitigte poverty.

boldapproach.org

One only reads what they want to read. The Fraser Institute, has never disputed that outside variables will impact a school. The key to mitigate them is to given them a good education on the ABCs, Give them the skills they need to navigate through society. The trouble in today’s schools, is the critical thinking skills are not fully developed, and most children, when in adulthood, do not have the skills to determine their own needs. What is being produced out of high school, is the great majority, think of themselves as being limited. In a way they are right, they are limited, because they were never given the skills, the basic foundation to determine their own needs, from the public education system. Nor have the children and the parents been given the respect, or the power to determine their own pathway, and their own needs. As parents we lost the ability, as soon as the child sets forth at the beginning of school. It is where the so-called education authorities, that have already determined who will, how , they will received an education. My child never became a good reader, because the so-called authorities deem phonemic awareness unnecessary. The one thing she needed to become a good reader, was denied to her. 

As for the Fraser Institute, and Claudia Hepburn. There is a reason why she believes in choice.

“Growing up in Toronto, Claudia knew what it was like to attend a school that?s not working for you. ?Some kids do well in some schools, less well in others. Often it?s just a compatibility issue. Thanks to my parents? capacity to choose, I was able to attend a more compatible school when one wasn?t working out for me.? After three schools (public and private), Claudia finally found a small, private school that inspired her to believe in herself, to be creative and to excel. Were it not for a choice, Claudia?s path may have been very different.
After getting a B.A. in the U.S., and a Master of English Literature from University of Toronto, Claudia embarked on her career as an educator abroad ? teaching in Hong Kong and Poland. “

http://www.womenspost.ca/articles/profiles/claudia-hepburn-putting-children-first

There is a story behind it. A story of a child and parents, looking for a school that would work with the child strengths, while improving her weaknesses. The main fault of a public school, is to look at the child through the lens of their weakness, and give them an education to that level.  Their strengths, are ignored. It is a recipe of killing children’s curiosity and creativity. In other words, keep giving them the message they are weak. I have seen far too many children, that see themselves as lesser , less equal to another child.

While exploring I came upon a old TV clip on CBC.
One might consider the good senator, as being one of the fathers of choice or the beginnings of choice. It is back in the days, when politicians acted like politicians, given all no matter who they were, his time, his expertise and all done in manner of keeping the respect and dignity of the person or persons. In the clip, he will describe rural people differently, from the descriptions of today. In today’s world, we seem to be too stupid to grasp even the most basic idea of a political concept, unless it is spoon-fed to us, or even know what is good for us.

“Senator Donald Cameron
Broadcast Date: July 10, 1972

Education must be a top priority for provincial governments across the country, says Donald Cameron in this 1972 interview. Now a senator, but still passionate about learning, Cameron tells the story of the weekly Sunday night community meetings he held in his house. He discusses rural politics in Alberta, particularly the United Farm Workers of Alberta, an organization of which he and his fathers were members. He also touches on the experience of the farmer during the Depression, and offers his insights into the rise of the Social Credit party in Alberta.”

http://archives.cbc.ca/society/education/clips/15727/

Explanation of FI and Hoover available

I decided to searched for the teachability index.  What can I tell you, I become very curious when I learned new information or knowledge.  The summary is in the first link. I would say, this would be an interesting way of providing data, that would put teachers’ unions claims of more money, in dispute.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_06.htm

While on the site, I explored and came up with a few that certainly cleared up some issues within my own head.

The Science of Reading Instruction
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cb_49.htm

End the Special-Ed Racket
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/miarticle.htm?id=5521

The Problems With Special-Ed
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/miarticle.htm?id=5303

Bear in mind when reading those links that they refer to Special Education practices in the USA, not Canada.  Each Canadian province is different, but in Ontario, schools do *not* have any financial or other incentive to identify children as “learning disabled” or as having any other particular disability.  Whether the child is “identified” or not has no bearing on what instructional services or supports s/he may receive in school.

The decision to have a child tested by a psychologist is the parent’s decision, not the school’s, and so is the decision to proceed to an Identification, Placement and Review Committee for a Special Education designation.  Often the impetus to do so *does* come from a parent, because certain services from other community agencies and government ministries are available only to students with a formal designation, such as autism, Low Vision or Learning Disability.

Since segregated Special Education programs are being phased out as much as possible, instructional supports do not depend on “Special Ed” labeling, and neither does development of an Individual Education Plan, if needed. No additional funds are available to schools with high numbers of “special needs” students: funding for special education is on a per capita basis, not on the basis of real or estimated student needs. While during the Harris years there was a scramble for specific amounts of money allocated to high-needs students, this funding mechanism was abolished years ago and replaced with grants to each board on a per capita basis.

All schools have staff designated to provide in-class or resource support to students identified as needing such support, regardless of whether they have “special ed” labels or not.  Parent and teacher requests, results of screening and regular reading assessments, and other factors come into play. Because all students are given formal reading assessments several times a year, there is no chance at all that a child with weak reading or written language skills will go unnoticed.

>>all students are given formal reading assessments several times a year<<

What do these assesments consist in?

How are the assesment results communicated to the parents?

I’ve never heard from anybody getting the results of a reading assesment as part of the report card.
Most parents would like to know concretely how well their son or daugther is doing.

What do these assesments consist in?

I gave some details and links on the “Secrets of Direct Instruction” thread. All primary/junior grade students are assessed at least once per term with the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) or something similar (the DRA is the most commonly used, but some boards use PM Benchmarks or the new Fountas and Pinnell assessment). These are 1:1 reading assessments and fairly time consuming.

How are the assesment results communicated to the parents?

In person, as a rule. The test itself would not normally be shown to a parent, but the level reached and the strengths/weaknesses would be part of ongoing planning and formative assessment.  The child’s performance suggests what level and focus for Guided Reading groupings as well as take-home books.

I?ve never heard from anybody getting the results of a reading assesment as part of the report card.

Good. These assessments are not supposed to be part of the report card.

Most parents would like to know concretely how well their son or daugther is doing

The “level” (DRA levels are usually numbers, but they correspond with Fountas and Pinnell Guided Reading levels which are alphabet letters. End of Grade 1 is usually Level 16-18, or F&P level J-K.) should give parents some idea of what text the child can read. Usually the “independent level” is a bit lower than the “instructional” level.

Some schools teach the “five finger rule”—if there are 5 or more words on a page that the child can’t read, the book is too hard.

If you go to the http://www.readinga-z.com site and browse some of the free samples, you can see selected texts for various levels, and I believe they also have a correlation chart that translates the letters and numbers into particular grade levels.

Because all students are given formal reading assessments several times a year, there is no chance at all that a child with weak reading or written language skills will go unnoticed”

And in the last post by TDSBNW, the explanation of assessment. All I can say, looks great on paper, but in reality, many kids are being missed and identified as having a reading problem. Children like mine, have very good compensatory skills, and are able to make a passing grade on reading, and writing.  I often wondered, if my child did indeed make a passing grade, because of her good behaviour, her good looks, and high achievement in different areas other than reading and writing. Parents do have difficulty in getting assessments. My story, is not an isolated case. There is probably 5 to 10 parents in a typical grade 1 class, seeking answers to their questions. Why little Suzie, is leaving out her vowels in writing. When my child is reading to me, she is missing words or changing the words. Or the big one, I have observed that little Suzie does not know how to sound out strange words in reading, and that is a common question. I did not learn the answer to that question, until the report of the psycho-educational assessment, at the end of grade 3. The assessment that I was requesting from grade 1, was finally approved, when I withdrew all support from home, so she would be failing in all core subjects. A strategy done by many parents right across Canada. The children are in the mild to moderate LD category, and for the most part, their learning problems are blamed on external factors, such as behavioural traits.

Now things have change in Canada, where it is much easier to arranged an assessment, but the children are now on a very long waiting list. Often taking 1 to 2 years to get one. The kids with less obvious problems, wait longer and are often pushed down on the list, to take of the needier cases.

As for reading assessments, primary teachers will often supply the reading material in advance for students who are struggling in reading, before the reading assessment. As a result, it appears that they do not have a problem in reading.

It is the design and the structure of the public education system, where many are indeed missed when it comes to reading and writing problems. As TDSBNW can state with confidence of what he believes that children with difficulties are not being missed. He can do that, because the public education systems of Canada, do not published any stats regarding children who have been cited for help in reading and writing, with or without being identified with a learning disability.  Nor do they provide information on the type of programs that are offered to remedied weaknesses in reading and writing. The stats that are published, only points but does not confirm that reading and writing problems are being address effectively by the schools. Nor does standard testing, follow the students who have failed in the grade 3 assessments, in the later assessments to see if improvement has been made. The weakness here, is that hard copies are not made available to the individual schools, to determined why they have failed. All they have are the numbers on a piece of paper, which does not tell anyone where the difficulties lie, providing that prior knowledge is not a factor.

Check the Sunshine list, on SQE to see the number of students failing to achieved a level 3 or more. Than asked yourself, why the figures have not moved significantly, despite increased funding in education. Than asked yourself, what other factors, other than the factors that are measured, are contributing to the achievement failure rate. A good place to start, is the hard copies of the CRTs. It will become apparent, poor reading and writing skills.

Easy to remedied, but the system is designed to exclude most children, who are passing in their core subjects. They do not not meet the criteria.

The Canadian researchers have stated, that the provincial public education systems, are very good at picking up the severe reading and writing problems. What they do poorly, is picking up the children with mild to moderate reading and writing problems. They get the least help from the system.

Canada Stats produced a report in 2003, describing the state of SE in Canada. There has been little improvement in these stats.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-004-x/2007001/9631-eng.htm#e

I believe that a state of a school, can be measured by their ability to teach SE children to become good readers and writers. Failure to do so, it is likely that other children in the classroom will not become good readers and writers.

Another link, describing BC and failure of LD kids.
http://www.straight.com/article-116366/provincial-government-fails-learning-disabled-kids

I read Nancy`s last post with painful awareness of what is going on-
I read the link from Vancouver 2007-
It is very very simple-the blind are leading the blind.
We have to put the moose on the table.
Teacher is completely uneducated in the 44 speech sounds and 90 graphemes (pictures of speech sounds).
Completely uneducated on how to get a child to blend sounds-blending is a neurological capacity that LD kids have trouble with-completely uneducated in dealing with vowel discrimination problems which can be handled(easily) when teachers are trained-
Dysgraphia-give us 3 months-it is the brain that does not match what it hears to a symbol-direct multisensory instruction completely handles it-if a teacher is TRAINED-Teachers in SE are trained in theory-no practical application whatsoever-NOTHING-
It is malpractice all the way-I hate LD association-they`re not doing a job for those kids-they advocate for the deaf-the blind-the gifted and LD-They have a non specific to intervention model-it will never help-Autism has done a great job for kids-far superior to the LD ASSOCIATION-which remains non specific-they don`t have the knowledge to run a scientifically aligned organization.
Dr.Siegel doesn`t believe in provincial schools-either do I-They would just be warehoused-the blind would still lead.The science based intervention-still missing.

In this day and age-it`s completely and utterly unacceptable-but it is the status quo-who will make them change????

I know why kids miss letters and vowels-you wouldn`t want to know the answer!

Also-the email about testing from TDSBNW-
Why isn`t a child reading with ease and accurately-testing should be analyzed.
They usually struggle with spelling and writing as well-it`s a brain process-
There are 6 symptoms in the reading and spelling struggler-and neurological multisensory explicit intervention that handles all the problems at the same time!
Called multisensory simultaneous modality teaching!

I came across an easy to understand model of reading and writing.

“The cognitive ?Framework A?

SEDL (2008)[4] developed a research-based graphic ?Framework A? that illustrates the cognitive components of reading development. The components are shown as separate within this diagram but in fact they are all linked and intertwined. The ?Framework A? illustrates how these important components of reading development build up from the bottom, the foundation toward reading comprehension as the goal at the top.”

On one side of the A is red and the other side is blue.

“Red Side of ?Framework A? (the ?oral? side, the comprehension of language):

Phonology (sounds of the language), syntax (grammar) and semantics (word knowledge/vocabulary) all contribute to a child?s linguistic knowledge (ability to put together or understand proper sentences).
Background knowledge combined with linguistic knowledge completes the necessary components for language comprehension.

Blue Side (the ?written? side, the decoding of text):

Concepts about print (child?s knowledge of the form and purpose of written text) combined with phoneme awareness (ability to manipulate the sounds in language) are foundational skills required for reading.

Knowledge of the alphabetic principle and letter knowledge build upon the foundational skills.

These components combine to create a child?s lexical knowledge (knowledge of printed words) and cipher knowledge (understanding the rules for writing and spelling), which in turn determine a child?s decoding skills (ability to break sentences into words and into units of meaning). “

http://www.foundationsforliteracy.ca/index.php/Reading_and_writing_development

It is the best I have every seen, breaking it into easier language, and understanding how everything connects. A parent armed with the A, would be able to make mince meat when a teacher are suggesting that it is behaviour, or any of the various excuses used, and would really show the lack of knowledge and training the teacher had.

Now the first link, is easy language and understanding, and it is the first link, that brings an complicated subject down to its core knowledge. The second link, are the people who have developed the A framework. The below link, is where one will find the details of each part. And how each part of reading and writing, are connected. Weak in one area, will impact other areas. It will show the link between weaknesses in reading, will lead to trouble in writing.

The 14 Cognitive Elements of Reading
http://www.sedl.org/reading/framework/elements.html

It is aimed at teachers. It certainly puts an end to the crazy whole language approach, where reading in their eyes is a natural process, and therefore the many different elements can be by-passed.

But more importantly, parents in Canada, armed with the A framework, can effect change at the bottom of the food chain. The schools are least likely to communicate to parents knowledge on the reading and writing processes, based on the science.

Bravo!

Now all you have to do is tell the Universities about this and ask them to train the teachers!

Nancy,it is so complex-and to think with all you have learned and is readily available on the net- the Universities remain entrenched in the B.ED Curriculum to not teach teachers how to teach Reading.
It is all based on a professor`s view point.

Joanne, I agree that LD organizations are not doing a good job on imparting knowledge, on the science of reading and writing. In Canada, they have not reached the heights of what is occurring in United States. However, the LD organizations lack the funding, to have the same impact as the Autism society.

The difference I see between the two, is the Autism societies work at the grassroots to provide education, services, to all; and at the same time, lobbying in the high levels of the political and education levels, to effect change. The LD organizations, have a problem with image, and the parents have to go looking for information. But the real crux of their problem, is not having a grassroots chapter at each school, to provide information for parents and teachers. They do not do enough grassroots activity, to spread the word. The Autism folks do a much better job at it, but here too, they are experiencing major trouble at the school level, in the educational component. If a school is not giving a Autism child and their parents the run around, they are doing it to the LD kids and their parents.

This is why I believe the Autism and the LD should be tied in at the school level, to form the groups at the school level, because both groups are greatly impacted by how the public education system handles education issues, and as well as the remediation of learning issues, that I have observed are questionable, and a waste of time and resources.

I don`t know what to think so I won`t say any more-I think it is because LD advocates for many groups-it is hard for them to be specific.
Scientific Reading Intervention given before age of assessment-grade 3 stops most kids from needing the label-I`m more into that:)

Psst Joanne…...I have a plan hatched for June. I write my annually letter to key figures in the education field within the province, on the trials and tribulations of my child, and how the education policies impact my child’s education. This year, armed with the A framework, I will go after the poor training, and if the teachers did indeed have any. I will followed along the A-Frame, using my kid as the example. Instead of staying within the province, I will expand it to all of the education faculties and the other national organizations.

It is evident with the knowledge you`ve accrued ,your will,knowledge and insistence on transparency that you will make a great contribution.

Here is the outline on the American LD site. It is much more in line with people who have the knowledge, But for us parents, it is learning a whole new language, and sometimes starting at the basic level, and work up, is a whole lot easier to absorbed the knowledge. In the primary grades, this type of information just does not exist, unless one is lucky to have a teacher with this knowledge. I too believe, if reading was handle properly in the primary grades, along with the writing, they would be few being identified if any, that needed special help outside the classroom, after grade 3. The bonus, children would love to read, without spending money on resources to promote the love of reading.

http://www.ldonline.org/article/A_Scientific_Approach_to_Reading_Instruction

I learn something new today. It is called knowledge translation. It does explain some of the reasons why research is not widely used to form decisions, policies on education.

http://www.ncddr.org/kt/products/focus/focus14/