tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18169339.post117009079349057685..comments2023-09-09T06:30:02.324-05:00Comments on Citizens for Reasonable And Fair Taxes: The Read Naturally ProgramUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18169339.post-49864887865705023352009-10-29T06:59:53.104-05:002009-10-29T06:59:53.104-05:00I have used the Read Naturally program for the pas...I have used the Read Naturally program for the past 5 years with students who have learning disabilities, primarily reading disabilities, and have seen tremendous success with students often jumping 2-3 grade levels in a year. From my experience, it has failed no one. Everyone who has been on the program has made significant progress. I teach in a private school for students with learning difficulties. Dorothy AbelsonUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16163552446172738543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18169339.post-66823667628836358982007-05-30T23:23:00.000-05:002007-05-30T23:23:00.000-05:00After using Read Naturally for a school year with ...After using Read Naturally for a school year with primarily bilingual first graders, I am extremely impressed with the increase in fluency rates I have seen and the interest in reading. <BR/>I have seen significant increases in wpm rates as well as ability to read naturally in very short periods of time, one little boy starte in January at 9 wpm in level 1.0 and by March was reading 39 wpm on the cold and 53 on the rehearsed after 3 days with excellent comprehension.Jan Davidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11531126528287875751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18169339.post-83812977218196522172007-03-20T15:28:00.000-05:002007-03-20T15:28:00.000-05:00The Read Naturally program you commented on at Cit...The Read Naturally program you commented on at Citizens for Reasonable and Fair Taxes was started in 1991 and has had tremendous success at accelerating the reading achievement of developing and struggling readers by combining the research proven strategies of teacher modeling, repeated reading and progress monitoring.<BR/><BR/>At Read Naturally’s website (www.readnaturally.com) you will see a sample of the comments that demonstrate the enthusiasm teachers and students have for the Read Naturally strategy. In addition, there are numerous studies in the Research and Rationale section verifying the effectiveness of the Read Naturally strategy.<BR/><BR/>The Read Naturally program is very cost effective because of its low cost, reproducible materials and independent nature that allows teachers and teacher assistants to supervise up to 12 students at a time.<BR/><BR/>The posting at Citizens for Reasonable and Fair Taxes was perceptive in noting that reading is not natural and that reading requires direct instruction. Read Naturally was named to describe how a student could read a passage after following the Read Naturally steps.<BR/><BR/>The posting was also accurate in labeling the Denton study a screwy design. The study, “The Effects of Two Tutoring Programs on the English Reading Development of Spanish-English Bilingual Students” published in the Elementary School Journal in 2004 used Read Naturally passages but not the Read Naturally strategy:<BR/><BR/>1. The Denton study’s use of audio tapes was inconsistent – when the tutors, volunteer undergraduate students read to the students it would have been likely that the passages would be read at less than optimal rates. Also, they would not have had rate increase from the first to second read along and increase again from the second to third read along.<BR/>2. The Denton study’s inclusion of oral discussion sessions of vocabulary and comprehension in the process would have reduced the time spent reading.<BR/>3. The Denton study’s inclusion of vocabulary activities such as flash cards and pre-reading in the process would also have reduced the time spent reading. <BR/>4. The students in the Denton study were not held accountable to Read Naturally’s four criteria to pass (reach goal rate, 3 or fewer errors, read with good expression and answer all the questions correctly). Students were not required to go back and master any of the criteria they failed on the first pass attempt.<BR/><BR/>Shortcomings of Denton Study Assessments<BR/><BR/>In addition to making substantial changes to the Read Naturally strategy, two of the three measures the Denton study used to evaluate student performance are not areas that Read Naturally claims to address. The Denton study used word identification from a list as one of the assessment tools. This is not part of the Read Naturally strategy. Instead, the Read Naturally strategy, if implemented correctly will improve fluency (rate, accuracy and expression) of reading words in context.<BR/><BR/>The second assessment measure, phonemic decoding, is also not part of the Read Naturally strategy and consequently even if the Read Naturally strategy would have been implemented correctly it would not have impacted phonemic decoding.<BR/><BR/>The What Works Clearinghouse titled its review Read Naturally, in spite of the fact that the study did not use the prescribed Read Naturally strategy and that 67% of the assessment was in areas that Read Naturally does not claim to address.<BR/><BR/>The third assessment component was comprehension. The comprehension assessment in the study was also flawed because there are no comprehension assessment tools that are sensitive enough to note improvements in only a ten week period.<BR/><BR/>Also, even though Read Naturally is regarded as the best fluency building program on the market that also improves comprehension and vocabulary, the study did not assess the fluency improvement of the students in the study.<BR/><BR/>What Works Clearinghouse has pulled its review of the Denton Study.<BR/><BR/>Tom IhnotUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00371110983922311675noreply@blogger.com