Thanks Des

Glad you are happy, and your kid is making progress. I have a slower going kid I am working with right now (had to do LiPS)— but his mom says he is trying to read signs and even read a book with some help.

Too bad the schools are not really doing their jobs, despite all the talk of NCLB and all. I understand that in the public schools here Wilson training is totally optional (or for that matter any sort of real reading instruction) for special ed. teachers. And the majority of them are using whole language.

—des

Unfortunately,I have met alot of other parents whose kids are not reading well at this school and they are not in the special ed. It amazes me that the school has made yearly progress, but yet I see all this illiteracy.

Your post suggests that some students in your daughter’s school read well. Other students who have not been defined as special educations students do not read well.

Has the school made an attempt to identify the reasons for the difference in reading ability among non-special education students? What has the school done to correct this disparity? How does the school measure the progress in reading ability it is reporting?

Arthur, I think from research we know pretty well what is happening. About 1/3 of all kids will read with out much intervention at all and hardly any teaching (these are the successes of whole language, if you can call them that, which I wouldn’t). Another 1/3 require instruction in reading to various degrees. These kids would do well with something like Open Court or some other fairly sound reading program. And another 1/3 need more extensive intervention. Not all of these are dyslexic— (haha, you do the math— depends on if you think it is 1/10 or 1/5). Some of the programs that work for these kids might be the intervention programs Open Court (over and above their basics), Wilson Fundations, etc have developed. MOST kids do not need OG style intervention. But most kids are not getting anywhere near what they need, even with NCLB.

Since a lot of kids are still getting whole language there are a real lot of struggling kids. Some of them will kind of limp along being a grade or two behind.

I imagine that Auditory mom here will have a dyslexic kid reading better than some of her nondyslexic peers in a 2-3 years or so, if she keeps at it.

—des

The Washington State Assesment test is going to be the only test for the kids now in our school district for non sped students. I am not sure how one can tell if a child is progressing in reading, as you are tested to see if you meet standard for that year. I need to talk to the higher ups to see what they say. With the Average Yearly Progress information the school divides kids into subgroups and if the subgroup is less than 30 students they don’t show the AYP for that group. I am not sure if the subgroups are exluded in in the total AYP or not. Another good question. According to another parent, the principal blames the kids, saying that it is a transient neighborhood and that is why the WASL scores are not as good as neighboring schools. Which is funny because alot of the parents that I know have had their kids in there since kindergarten. The principal had told me previously when I mentioned that phonics should be worked on, that they don’t work on phonics past 3rd grade. The school later did introduce Zoo phonics. Too little too late for alot of kids.-

A few more gentle questions that you might or might not choose to answer:

(1) Did you have every reason to suspect that you daughter would be achieving at an average level or better before she began Grade 1?

(2) Does your daughter have a least one good friend?

(3) Does she have at least average (measured) intelligence? Perhaps an IQ score…

(4) Do you have a measure of her current reading ability in simple terms (i.e. She reads at the Grade 6, Fifth month level)? Quick tests are available to provide this information.

(5) Does your daughter want to improve her reading ability with sufficient sincerity to cooperate with her teachers?

Arthur, if she is getting Barton, she is getting a very effective program for dyslexic kids. This is an OG based program with tutor training videos for each level (about 5 hours of training per level as you do things while watching each tape). You are pretty well trained in effective methodology after awhile (though of course, some people get it better than others). I did the certification class and a couple people just couldn’t get it. Even though it is pretty scripted and so on. My feeling is that the school will not get it enough to do anythig that effective. (I had a student who did have Wilson at school but it was with 6 other kids or something.)

If she can do Barton, she has to have normal intelligence. It really doesn’t work well with low IQ kids. I did have a kid with a verbal IQ of 70 or so, but I suppose some Matthews effect had taken place, and I did simplify things. The vocabulary is pretty challenging.

I think she has been tested. We are discussing the testing of other kids, and whether they are actually kids left behind. My guess is that there are. Standardized group tests are fairly inaccurate. They do comprehension of short passages, but if you are smart you can do these without actually reading them. The quickest thing to test with is DIBELS. But if the kid has major fluency issues it will give the kid quite a low score (of course that is an important issue though). I don’t think there are other quick and dirty measures. IMO the WRAT smells. :-)

I thought the no. for exclusion was something like 10! (I mean for AYP). Of course there are lyin’ cheatin’ schools out there. A couple Middle Schools here say they have too low a special ed population to include. You know that in any moderately large city this is not possible. Another reason that NCLB is a nice idea that isn’t going to work. Of course according to NCLB they can NOT blame the kids, I mean it won’t help them any.

I doubt straight phonics would help your kid anyway. But this is a crazy idea the schools have and it isn’t the only time I have heard it. Of course they should work on phonics. By fourth grade and up they should add some morphology, etc.

Zoo phonics is fine for what I have heard here, but it isn’t enough for some kids, and won’t do the older kids much good.

—des

auditorymom and des,

I frequently read this kind of post from respected tutors: “I started tutoring a child reading at a mid-First Grade level and began using the XXX reading method. Within six months the child was almost at a Grade 3 level.”

I do not doubt the sincerity or the dedication of the tutor. I do not doubt the reliability of the reading method. I am curious about the assessment of reading ability. Is it all subjective? Was there objective testing before and after the six months of tutoring? Surely there must be some sound reading tests out there to measure candidates for the military, for universities and colleges, and for Grade 8.

What is the reading ability of the girl in question? What test was administered? What are the components of the plan to improve the child’s reading? Future tests that assess her achievement of those components will provide benchmarks on the path to an objective. I would categorize that process as interim testing. This should result in sound conclusions as to progress in reading ability or the lack of it.

There are publishers who make elaborate claims for their reading materials. What are the results? Some publishers refuse to provide such information. They rely on dubious testimonials.

The measure of good materials and good tutoring will be results. We never want to be in the shoes of the surgeon who was forced to admit, “The operation was a success, but the patient died.”

Several people here besides myself and aud. mom here are familiar with Barton. Patti actually knows Susan Barton fairly well. This is no fly by night sort of operation. It is intensive and has some serious research backing it up. It is an OG based program (it is really OG based as opposed to pretend OG), as such it is very solid in the research area. You did not read that after 6 months ___. I think she states she is midway thru book 2. Book 2 introduces all consonants and short vowel sounds, mostly with CVC patterns. As a matter of fact, she is nto claiming very fast progress. I think it is on the slow side with the experience I have had with ti. I’m guessing that her kid has some severe auditory processing problems. Nevertheless a really solid foundation at this point is necessary to get anywhere else. Getting thru fast isn’t the point.
Barton’s programs are not graded, so finishing book 2 does not mean a second grade level. OG is not at all grade level oriented, so you could have a student who reads and spells multisyllable words, but is not able to read a word like “fluid” or “bother”. It would be very hard to administer tests in between for that reason. Barton has been done with kids in settings that enabled the kids to receive testing, and there have been gains in things like the CTOPS and Gray’s Oral Reading. However, I have had kids tested who have gained a year or so in a eight months, something like that, according to standardized tests. Also I have had kids jump grade points from Cs to Bs, for instance. But I would make the cavaat that I am not a tester, and I can’t afford the tests at this point.If the parent asked for testing to prove achievement, I would refer them elsewhere, but either the parent is happy or they go elsewhere (or I would refer elsewhere if for some reason we are not making progress). This is NOT a quick method by any stretch, and I don’t feel it makes unreasonable claims.

There are NO good quick and dirty tests to measure progress. Kid’s often go in for the school tests and make more progress than would be expected, if you did nothing— but it is not a great measure. The quickest thing, as I said is DIBELS. You can download this free, but it has a major fluency factor to it. If you have a kid with major fluency issues, they will not score well and the child will look like he has made 0 progress even if they have gone from a nonreader to reading CVC words (which one of my kids has done). This is a fairly minute change by most factors, but this is a kid who could not pass the Barton screening (something like a short LAC), could not read any words, or imitate all sounds. There are criterion based tests at the end of each book or level, so say, at the end of book two (book 1 is entirely PA) a child must be able to read letters and say sounds, spell sounds, do a PA exercise involving getting the end, beginning and vowel sound for nonsense words, read and spell real and nonsense CVC words, and read short decodable sentences. Sine it is a pre and post test, you have a measure built in but it is not a grade level type thing. If the kid is a nonreader, then you can’t really give the pretest. Book two takes a kid from nonreader status to primer, I believe.
However, I have had kids on a 2-3 grade level that I still did book 2 with. I feel that it makes sure they don’t have holes in their skills.

The only meaningful testing would be something like the Woodcock Johnson or CTOPPS. It’s a great idea but I can’t afford it right now.

As for Aud. mom she is tutoring her own kid, if she is not happy with the progress she is making, Barton has guaranteed her money back.

Honestly I think this whole benchmark thing is overdone. I see the point for a public school that is trying to be accountable. But I have to be accountable or I lose clients. Mom is accountable as this is her own kid. The “benchmark” at the end of book 2 is something like “will read and spell any regular CVC word and hear the sounds within any regular CVC word”.

Arthur, what’s your point here? You seem to be going on and on about this with some bit of, I don’t know. I’m feeling like you are attackign us for some reason. Go read the website. Susan Barton has been trained in about 8 different OG methods, two LMB methods and spent over 10 years on this thing. YIKES.

—des

des,

Thanks for asking.

You asked, “Arthur, what’s your point here?”

I am from New England. Our wise carpenters have a quaint saying: “Measure twice; saw once.”

When my automobile is not running properly, I expect my mechanic to do a diagnostic test before he takes it apart. When my wife’s doctor says he feels a lump in her breast, I want the doctor to do some testing before she proposes a radical mastectomy. When a student fails to make progress in reading, I want to see some diagnostic test results before therapy begins.

I believe in measurement. Auditorymom commented on Sun Feb 27, 2005 10:14 pm: “I am not sure how one can tell if a child is progressing in reading.” You wrote in your post, “However, I have had kids on a 2-3 grade level that I still did book 2 with.” You are undoubted correct, but how can you substantiate those grade level numbers? Wouldn’t it be comforting to have a testing device that was able to confirm reading Grade scores?

I would like to be able to provide Auditorymom, and anyone else who has a similar need, with the name of an objective reading test that will supply measures of achievement and progress. You wrote that DIBELS can be downloaded free, but it has a major fluency factor to it. I would like to believe that a test exists that has no such major flaw. You also wrote: “If the parent asked for testing to prove achievement, I would refer them elsewhere.” My question is, “Where?”

You wrote: “You seem to be going on and on about this with some bit of, I don’t know. I’m feeling like you are attackign us for some reason. Go read the website. Susan Barton has been trained in about 8 different OG methods, two LMB methods and spent over 10 years on this thing. YIKES.”

No one who is working as hard as you and Patti to improve the reading ability of LD students should be attacked or even sense you are being attacked. You should, instead, be praised for your service. You have both served LD students with dedication following years of education and experience. Since you and Patti are using the Susan Barton method, I have every reason to believe you have checked out other methods and you sincerely believe Barton is the most effective program for your students.

A true anecdote: “My son’s reading professor was belittling commercial educational tests and extolling the virtues of teacher-made tests. After some time Eric raised his hand and asked, “You believe teacher-made tests are superior. If teachers made and sold their tests wouldn’t those tests be superior commercial products?” Eric’s question was ignored.

There are several simple and objective tests.
When I start tutoring a child I hand him a book and asks to read it. Most of the kids I work with go “The … . Billy? Bingo? … .” A certain number say flat-out “I can’t read that.” A few would rather go into a major tantrum than try to read.
After I work with the child for several months, I hand him the same book and ask him to read, and he says “The Boxcar Children.” Perhaps slowly, perhaps with some hesitation, but definitely the words written on the page, which he could NOT read before.
This is factual and observable. No special tests are needed.
As a backup, I am entirely separate from the school system so their tests and reports are an unbiased measure. When I start with a child, the situation is usually pretty desperate, and the reports are saying something like “severely dyslexic, suggest transfer to special school, this school has no services to help this child.” After I work with the child for several months to a year, the reports are saying something like “good progress, needs to work on spelling and grammar”. This is a whole different world.
Formal objective tests were invented in order to deal with large numbers of people and have an outside standard. They serve many useful purposes. Measuring the tiny steps in progress of a beginning student in one-to-one tutoring is not really one of those purposes.

Thanks, Victoria. Yes that’s really the point of the expensive tests— measure a whole bunch of kids. Since I have only a few it is easy to gauge how well they are doing based on such homey measures as Victoria mentions. If a kid comes in and can read only a few CVC words, and ends up reading any I give him, that’s progress. The post test for Barton is a little bit finer method but it is only a help for the kind of observations that good teachers and tutors are using forever.

I have people I can send my student to if I feel they aren’t making progress. I assume this won’t happen very often. But the time it did, the problem was quite a bit differnet than a straight reading issue.

I have NEVER had a parent say “Is my child makign progress?” We both know if s/he is or isn’t. And usually there is no question that they are.
If there ever were a question, I could always show the pre-post tests. Before I start, I either require formal tests results or that I give a number of informal tests. I’ve found they match up pretty well with things like the CTOPPS and Grays but obviously this is a small sample.

Arthur, forum rules do not allow sellign of your materials in the forum. I think you can buy space from ldonline.

—des

Great, Victoria!

You wrote: “There are several simple and objective [reading] tests.”

This might provide Auditorymom with the information she seeks when she writes: “I am not sure how one can tell if a child is progressing in reading”

Please name the simple tests. Kindly include only valid tests (measures what it purports to measure) and reliable tests (scores can be replicated).

Objective tests might have little utility for knowledgeable, experienced tutors. They might prove invaluable to parents and tutors new to LD instruction.

Thanks for the “heads-up,” des. “Arthur, forum rules do not allow sellign of your materials in the forum. I think you can buy space from ldonline.”

I will not sell materials on this forum. If the Webmastress determines that my profile information following my posts is a violation of the rules, I will be happy to edit or remove it.

Thankfully, I have elected to refrain from commenting further on this topic.

It looks like I need to be more specific- when I wrote ” I am not sure how one can tell if a child is progressing in reading” I was referring to the state reading assessment they do in Washington. My child is on an IEP and has been tested every year with the WIAT or WJ, but this last year it is written on my child’s IEP that the pseudoword decoding section of the WIAT II test (which my child performed poorly on) is not valid because of my child’s decoding ability due to her speech apraxia according to the speech pathologist we had that year. I then called in a reading speech specialist (because I feared they were going to stop the decoding) who used a test called PAL, my child would not attempt alot of it, but it did show she needed more work in phonemic awareness. Basically, I have all the testing I need. Working with my child, though, I can see exactly what she needs. I guess Arthur, that you were offering me a reading test for my child, but I am not in need of any more tests at this point.

Arthur, the world’s simplest reading test:

Hand the child a book and have him read it to you.

To make this valid and replicatable and all that, use a carefully graded vocabulary-controlled reader from a reputable series.
Make sure it is a book that he has *not* read before so he is demonstrating reading skill rather than memorization.
Do not give any hints or suggestions or “help”, to make sure he is demonstrating skill in reading books and not people.
Do not stress the child by insisting on speed or your ideas of enunciation or whatever, just let him read.

Either the child can pronounce the words on the page 95% plus accurately, or not.
Either the child can answer factual comprehension questions like “What are they going to buy?” or he cannot.
Make sure to ask the questions about the words on the page and not on the pictures.

Progress through a series is very obvious and easy to check.

To validate and replicate, use another page in the same book, another book from the same series, or if necessary for a double-check, a reader with the same vocabulary development from another series that he has never seen before.

Either the child can read it to you or not. Case closed.