May 2003 — Special Feature
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Challenging Districts to 'Put Reading First'
The problems this creates for districts run deeper than the selection of an assessment instrument. "There's a lot of in-service training in our state Reading First plan, but the teachers in Michigan have been hostile to it - they see it as a disconnected add-on, not aligned with the MLPP," says Paris.
U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige has sent out a letter assuring everyone that there is no list, and indeed several approved Reading First plans, such as Virginia's, have been approved using assessments that are not on "the list that isn't a list." Michigan's conundrum over which assessment instrument to use also touches on another serious challenge to districts regarding assessment requirements of Reading First. The law stipulates that schools must use screening, diagnostic and progress-monitoring assessments for determining student reading achievement - something that few teachers have been trained to do. Hupert explains that "the problems of struggling readers - the Reading First target population - vary enormously, but the average teacher with a master's degree receives a minimal amount of instruction in how to diagnose and work with reading difficulties. Districts are already striving to provide professional development for teachers who lack certification. Reading First allows for a substantial amount of resources to be directed toward professional development, but the need is vast."
Waiting for Reading First
Perhaps the most vexing challenge for districts is one of timing. David Rust, the vice president of development for Rigby Education, a Harcourt supplemental publisher, says, "Our experience is that the districts feel they cannot make any decisions until A, the state receives notice that its application has been accepted and then B, the process has been defined for how that money gets awarded for schools and districts." In addition, Paris describes a situation in which "there is a paralysis - people are afraid of moving too quickly and creating something inconsistent with what the state wants to do. The districts want information more quickly than the states can provide it."
The cure for this paralysis may just be a matter of timing. States that are well into their subgrant process are generally content that the right information is flowing and that district decisions are being made swiftly so they can draw down the money. Indeed, the International Reading Association, which has been openly critical of some aspects of Reading First, has conducted a review of the process and found that the states were generally satisfied with the process and were not pressured into choosing from a list of prescribed reading programs.
Possible Solutions
If you are in a district that feels any of the paralysis that Paris describes, then there may be more to do than just be patient. This would be a good time to read up closely on the implications of the National Reading Panel's report, to read the Reading First documentation available online at www.ed.gov/offices/'ESE/readingfirst/ReviewCriteriaFINAL.doc, and to look at various funded state and district Reading First plans to see what has already been done. (Most states post their plans on their department of education's Web site once it is approved.) It is also crucial to begin a dialogue with your state Reading First officials. According to Rust, "There are a few cases where districts have had a prearrangement with a state that the moment a state application is approved, the district can go ahead and make the purchase. Doing advance work like this makes the spending happen faster."
