Where is Michael Strembitsky?

Before Angus McBeath, there was Michael Strembitsky.

I think he was the one who had the insight and inspiration for the “Edmonton Model”.

I remember him speaking to us in Vancouver in the 70s?, 80s? ...... about not all grocers stocking avocados, because not all communities liked avocados ...... his way of saying there must be diversity and meeting of community and customer preferences…..why not schools?

So, let’s look him up.  And why is he not highlighted along with Jeb Bush as being an outstanding figure in education reform efforts?

Oh so now Jeb Bush is OK, what next the Tea Party and Sarah Palin?

Probably best to let those who choose to consider what he’s saying decide whether or not he’s credible.

The adults who’ll attend don’t need anyone to judge who thay’ll be listening to; this isn’t high school anymore.

The good news is that you can spend your time hanging out with folks who share your worldview.

Doug, you really should not make fun of the Bushes, who do have an intense and personal interest in literacy and education. As you may know, but perhaps you have forgotten, learning problems run across all social/economic backgrounds and for some families it is generational, and science is confirming it bit by bit. regarding the inherited trait. It is believe that George Bush, the first president also had a learning disorder but it has never been confirmed by the family.but it is suspect among the experts in LD. Saying that, the next link is a short bio on Barbara Bush.

“ During the eight years of her husband’s vice presidency (1981–89), Barbara campaigned to improve literacy. Motivated by her son Neil’s dyslexia and by her belief that many other social problems, such as homelessness, were connected to illiteracy, she spoke at hundreds of events, where she often appeared with new readers. In 1989 she established the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy. The profits earned by her first book, C. Fred’s Story (1984), written about the Bush family in the voice of their cocker spaniel, were donated to literacy charities, as was the nearly $1 million earned by Millie’s Book (1990), written while she was first lady, about the springer spaniel that she took to the White House.“

http://www.britannica.com/presidents/article-9104145

People who have gone through the experience of a learning difficulty, are people that will stand firmly knowing what is wrong with the public education system, the cure is a solid education that is based on firm foundations, and not the shaky foundations that the present system uses, that are forever shifting and goal posts be moved, to create a new standard.

Not make fun of the Bushes? What is there left that is any fun. NCLB, what a disaster! Right wing education reform always ends in disaster.

“Not make fun of the Bushes? What is there left that is any fun. NCLB, what a disaster! Right wing education reform always ends in disaster.“

What’s hilarious about this useful idiot’s quote is that in the nether reaches of Doug’s mind he believes we care about what he has to say….um…nope.

Keep up the “useful” status sir, you’re making the case for us better each and every day.

And the left is always a disaster, where it feeds the public education system, and do a very good job on blaming the kids for the state of the education system. What both sides are dealing with, including the middle guys, are an education system who is unwilling to do things differently, because in the end, your job would become much harder, when the first generation under the new system, will know BS when they see it. At least the right will acknowledge that the main bulk of reading problems can be corrected, through education, with the right programs, but the left now that is a different kettle of fish. The left likes to divide people up into groups of non-white, white, low/middle/high income, blue eyes to dark eyes, blonds to brunettes, and whatever other goofy categories that really have no basis in the education of children, but the left persist in seeing human beings as something that can be classified in various groups, and failure is assigned to the traits of the various groups rather than poor instruction. But you have to take it one step further, by openly demanding parents to make changes, sign contracts, such as reading to your child for two nights a week, and received a bronze medal, without ever stepping into the person’s home. And the left calls it education, by using the bad results, setting it up as ‘created need’, to build upon the empire of public education.

“"Based on my anecdotal observations, I’d bet that over half the boys enrolled as perfectly normal boys in FI in Grade One are spat out by Grade Three (or whenever their parents notice they can’t read) as so-called ‘gifted learning disabled.‘  Gifted my foot, and LD my ***.  They simply haven’t been explicitly taught much of anything there, and so are behind their peers in skills while being equally intelligent.  The gifted tag might come from the coping skills they’ve had to develop to compensate for their lack of reading skills.

“It’s called ‘created need’ and its purpose is building up the empire of public education.  Any school board that isn’t naming and fighting this phenomenon is complicit at best.

“I don’t normally flog my own work, but honestly, when we are faced with this kind of baloney, rationalization, and profiteering off these kids, this information obviously can’t be flogged enough”

http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/reportcard/archive/2009/02/28/boys-and-french-immersion-education.aspx

She has a point.

What do we think of a person who hides their own identity and with it their credibility like Mr Sheep.

Doretta, you can tell me what you think of notasheep’s choice of language. I only know that if I spoke like that, I would be called on it very quickly.

Mr Sheep, have you noticed that not one single board of education operates the way you like. Not one single province supports your educational views, very very few credible educators support your point of view,

You are losing this education struggle very badly which is probably what brings out your temper. Polls show us your views are unpopular, testing shows us that you are wrong and you, of course, want to shoot the messinger. I’m just the messinger Mr Sheep that you are wrong about almost everything in education almost every day. Live with it.

It must be very frustrating that nobody listens to your POV Nancy? Could it be that you are just wrong?

Well Doug, you are the only person here, that has not the foggiest idea how children work. I think you see them as conniving little devils, that if given an inch, they will take a mile. With some of the remarks that you have stated regarding teaching practices, and how children learn, even in today’s teaching colleges would be given a great big fat zero on the test.

As I had stated, take a child who has a reading problem, even try one of the easy ones, where they need targeted help, and see how far you go with the child. Better yet, why not test to see whose teaching methods are best, taking two children who have relatively the same type of reading problems, and just to make it interesting, taken from the same cultural and income group. I am sure that SQE can find someone willing to do it, using SQE methods. Of course finding the children should be no problem of all, if anything there is plenty to chose from.

As for your comments directed at notasheep, you have said far worse things, without a wit of humor, designed to have one of us react with emotion, rather than the facts. At least notasheep did it with humor. A sure sign, of a pleasant human being behind his user name.

“Doretta, you can tell me what you think of notasheep’s choice of language. I only know that if I spoke like that, I would be called on it very quickly.“

You’ve said much worse Mr. Little and it’s been let go.

Could it be that it supports SQE?

I am not the angry one Doug. Your post sure sounds angry in its kneejerk way actually.

Nancy - keep on writing because there are hundreds of people every day who stop bye here, reading and paying close attention to what you have to say.

Don’t let the spin of an angry fellow discourage you.

Then again, as a veteran parent from the battles that public education has put your though, this place is heaven on earth.

In reference to your original post Doretta, it would appear that SQE is making the type of inroads re: more choice for parents within the TDSB in a short period of time.

Can’t wait for SQE’s model of traditional schools to take shape - same board is obvious open to all kinds of possibilities.

Can you tell us if any other boards in the province have benefited from SQE knowledge and resources like Stairway to Reading?

Thanks notasheep. It is probably the only site in Canada, where veteran parents feel welcome. I am here for a reason, based on the fact that my child should never have gone through all the unnecessary learning problems she has had. If she was given proper reading and writing instruction and numeracy instruction, I am sure she would not have been identified as having a learning problem.

When you start out, the majority of parents do not have this knowledge, and I am particular angry about this issue. It is knowledge that should be commonly known, but it is not. The researchers, and yes I have called the Canadian researchers, (and they are quite happy to talk to parents, especially when you went to the bother of finding their contact information); have stated time and time again, their knowledge and information does not get passed down throughout the system. Add to the fact of new education lingo, coining new terms, designed to confuse everyday folk, like the one I learned today from SQE, ‘created needs’, a parent needs to have their wits on at all time, besides wearing different types of hats, Today my background in basic economics serve me well, reading all about the public education system in a different light. Pleasant change, from reading law, a new reading skill that was acquired over the years, to read about the latest rounds of how the public education system will fight to have the right to deny services with kids who have low reading skills. If not that learning how the management models of public education systems, can impact all children negatively in their education. There is some days, I wish I could afford the tuition of a top private school, and I could go back to doing what I was doing before, and that is unaware of how twisted the public education system has become.

As for Doug, he is the least of my troubles. But I often wonder why he does not go on the American sites, and tackled the LD parents who write such stinging criticism of the public education system. I have almost been tempted, to passed some of the comments to the LD forums, and sic the LD Mafia after him. All they want is their children to learn how to read and write well, and most if not all are confirmed believers of Direct Instruction. I have been tempted to and I might one day, just to get Doug see the other side, and take off the rose-colour glasses and blinders and see the education system for what it is, and not what he wishes it to be.

Nancy, rest assured that Doug knows very well how bad our system is:  he worked in it.  What I can’t fathom (along with many others I’m sure) is that Mr. Little and the rest of his kind have chosen the unions’ money and power over the welfare of children.  They’ve chosen this!

I’d remind ALL readers to chill out and participate in reasoned. respectful debate not personal insults nor childish ZZZs. 

If you get angry—do something constructive for students’ learning—suport an advocacy group, tutor a student, lobby your policitians, whatever strikes your fancy.  If it bores you to snores, quit.

Tunya,Michael Strembitsky piloted the idea in the mid ‘70s. and carried on by Emery Dodsall who ended up in BC as a deputy minister of ed. McBeath was responsble for actually implementing the program board-wide
Read his words here:  http://www.aims.ca/library/ep_accountabilityinpublicschools_macbeath.pdf

Sheep: Some boards are using DI and systematic phonics. Joanne could probably fill you in on which ones.  Usually they are quiet about it—does’t fit in the the Literacy and Numeracy politburo mandate. However, I will add that we do get hundreds of requests to download STR from teachers through their school boards.

That’s good news, Doretta.

I know the Alberta way, is an effective system. A friend of my child moved from NL to Alberta at the last quarter of the school year, and was currently in grade 6. In the new school year, she repeated grade 6 in the Alberta to bring up her reading and writing deficits. This child was a really bright child, quick on her feet, but she lack some fundamental reading and writing skills. She was the classic under-achiever, and now she is a A student, and has been since grade 7.

I read the McBeath discussion. I especially like how they behaviour to high standards. I often been accuse of having high standards for my children, when it comes to doing homework, and other school related activities. But when I expected help from the school, my standards were much too high to meet. Often happened with my youngest, pressing for help in reading and writing.

“Usually they are quiet about it—does’t fit in the the Literacy and Numeracy politburo mandate. However, I will add that we do get hundreds of requests to download STR from teachers through their school boards.“

I echo Bev Doretta - that teachers are making use of the SQE developed program IS good news, but it shouldn’t be quiet at all.  Good news like that needs sharing both by the educators and SQE.

How like the politburo to make direct phonics instruction almost an underground effort for those individual teachers who really do want to see their students succeed.

What possible reason would a school system have not to teach children to read in one of the best, and proven methods?

I’m glad that SQE is there for teachers who want to move to something new and improved.

That’s it? A few under the radar teachers? Sad.

I am commenting on the DI and Phonics comment a few postings ago.

School boards that have “bought into"my systematic synhthetic phonics curriculum and training have done so
for identified special education students only.In other words,to remediate-not teach.Then,they say-we better do this with the youngsters that aren`t learning too before they are identified.It is not allowed as a curriculum for mainstream because it is looked down upon as not being context based learning.That`s the disease in Canada.
I would have thought the fact that we are all on the net and that global research discoveries are available for all to see and read we would be disseminating research through Universities and trying to apply the results of the Dr.Rose study in England-the results of the NICHD Research study-the National Reading Panel-but no-individual thought depending on who is hired at the Secretariat describes the curriculum.
My friend at TDSB-who is a speech path and many of them read the research-say-WHAT IS IT?
I concur-what is it-what are they afraid of?
In closing this posting, a conference on Reading I attend annually in the U.S. that has speakers like Dr.Louisa Moats and Dr.Reid Lyon and Dr.Barbara Foorman recently also had Dr.Michael Fullan.He`s an advisor for the Ministry of Ed..Would you not think he would report back?

“That’s it? A few under the radar teachers? Sad.“

No Doug. It’s GREAT that by word of mouth what works will get around and there’s not one thing you can do about it.

Imagine how many fewer teachers and bureaucrats we’d need if only more children could be taught to read using the best method? Is this another ploy to keep teachers working? One sure must wonder about the cult-like attraction to failed methods by adults who surely can put two and two together.

Or is it sad that there’s only limited willingness to not adhere to the partyline? 

One would hope that a profession of tens of thousands professionals would always be willing to experiment.  Hopefully going along to get along isn’t the norm.

The powerful people in the ministry, the boards and the teachers’ colleges have looked at all the studies and evidence and simply concluded that you are wrong on the issues. Period. They are not “unaware” of your arguments, they think they are bogus.