tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post3618780282799882765..comments2024-03-26T14:44:37.985-04:00Comments on D-Ed Reckoning: The WWC falls down on the job againKDeRosahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06853211164976890091noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-87566985683850968772008-10-17T20:06:00.000-04:002008-10-17T20:06:00.000-04:00It's not only the WWC that is "falling down on the...It's not only the WWC that is "falling down on the job." The "Reading First Implementation Evaluation Final Report"<BR/><BR/>www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/readingfirst-final/readingfirst-final.pdf<BR/><BR/>sheds no light on "What Works." But the study relies on self reports of principals, "reading coaches" and teachers as indicators of "What's Happening" and on third and fourth grade standardized test scores at the school level from state-reported data bases as the indicator of "What is our children learning."<BR/><BR/>"What's happening" in Reading First schools is much what's happening in non-Reading First schools. And the few differences in "What's being learned" between RF and Non-RF amounts to only 2-3 percentage points.<BR/><BR/>The most telling finding is that 28% of k-3 kids were receiving "interventions." But with the "science" and the mandates, a lot of kids aren't being taught how to read. That's bad news. Even worse news: no more is known about how to accomplish the aspiration of NCLB than when the legislation was enacted.<BR/><BR/>Dick Schutz<BR/>3RsPlus@usinter.netAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-478370038600069112008-10-13T09:33:00.000-04:002008-10-13T09:33:00.000-04:00If it were a matter of choosing between what Zig s...If it were a matter of choosing between what Zig says and WWC says, Zig is the clear winner. But the matter of WWC is much more fundamental than the instances of Reading Mastery and Reading Recovery. <BR/><BR/>Let's buy the Institute of Medicine’s declaration, “A systematic review is a scientific investigation that focuses on a specific question…” WWC begs the “specific question” of reading instruction: teaching children to read any text with understanding equal to that were the communication spoken.<BR/><BR/>The cumulative evidence indicates that Reading Mastery reliably “works.” There are other “programs” that also deliver “readers.”<BR/><BR/>But what’s with WWC? It’s built on the proposition that the sole legitimate “design” is a randomized control comparative experiment. That’s an ex cathedra proposition not stipulated by god, the pope, or any scientific authority (outside of education). To the contrary. Over 40 years ago, Julian Stanley and Don Campbell showed conclusively that no situation in education meets the statistical requirements underlying this design. The invented a number of quasi-experimental designs to try to deal with the matter. Murray Sidman described an alternative logic of N=1 experimental designs even more applicable to instruction.<BR/><BR/>The mix of ideology and ineptitude has created a condition that would be comical were it not tragic. Out of one side of its mouth, the government contends that all the reading programs in schools are based on the “new science of reading.” Out of the other side of its mouth, the government is contending that very widely used programs such as Houghton-Mifflin and Open Court have no or very weak evidence that they work. On the output side the government is requiring the use of tests that are sensitive only to SES differences and not to instructional differences and mandating that schools and teachers register cumulative annual gains that are statistically impossible.<BR/><BR/>Zig says, “We need to engage in a full-fledged assault on WWC.” The thing is, there is no “we” and no operationalization of an “assault.”<BR/><BR/>Dick Schutz<BR/>3RsPlus@usinter.netAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-78142275233078107392008-10-09T23:13:00.000-04:002008-10-09T23:13:00.000-04:00My sobriquet for the WWC is "Wish it Worked" Clear...My <I>sobriquet</I> for the WWC is "Wish it Worked" Clearinghouse.<BR/><BR/>It epitomizes the triumph of hope over experience.palisadeskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13700503881038569921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-1412312767433227322008-10-09T11:00:00.000-04:002008-10-09T11:00:00.000-04:00Who's on WWC? Looking at their list of programs, ...Who's on WWC? Looking at their list of programs, it seemed like they went out of their way to filter as much as possible out through eligibility screens.<BR/><BR/>I thought it was bad until I looked at the math programs "reviewed". I think there's five total.CrypticLifehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05313033952671292402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-53029411626989307962008-10-09T09:16:00.000-04:002008-10-09T09:16:00.000-04:00Do Ohioans have a legal obligation to discount WWC...Do Ohioans have a legal obligation to discount WWC if we are to meet the legal standards required of educational decisionmaking? <BR/><BR/>See: <A HREF="http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/3301-35-04" REL="nofollow">3301-35-04 Student and other stakeholder focus</A><BR/><BR/>(A) To ensure that student and other stakeholder needs are understood and addressed, the school district or school shall:<BR/><BR/>...use assessment results and the value-added progress dimension to make informed decisions about curriculum, instruction, assessment, and goals;<BR/>...Monitor ... instructional materials to determine their effectiveness in helping students meet performance objectives;<BR/><BR/>(B) The school district or school shall implement a district-wide curriculum and instructional program that is characterized by systematic planning, articulation, and evaluation. The school district's curriculum shall be developed with input from and dialogue with parents, community members, and other stakeholders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25541994.post-12617316198532732882008-10-08T17:39:00.000-04:002008-10-08T17:39:00.000-04:00Ken,Good to see another post!Yes, it's extremely f...Ken,<BR/><BR/>Good to see another post!<BR/><BR/>Yes, it's extremely frustrating to see the What Works Clearinghouse unable to determine what works.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for a great analysis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com