As I prepare to take what is (hopefully) the last of the standardized tests that I must pass to continue to teach in California (RICA), one of the test-prep vendors recommended that their students read a 2001 publication titled, “Put Reading First: The Research Building Blocks for Teaching Children To Read. Kindergarten through Grade 3.”
Here’s the synopsis: “The understanding of "what works" in reading is dynamic and fluid, subject to ongoing review and assessment through serious research. While there are no easy answers or quick solutions for optimizing reading achievement, an extensive knowledge base now exists to show people the skills children must learn in order to read well. This guide, designed by teachers for teachers, begins the process of compiling the findings from scientifically based research in reading instruction, a body of knowledge that will continue to grow over time. The guide, designed by teachers for teachers, summarizes what researchers have discovered about how to successfully teach children to read. It describes the findings of the National Reading Panel Report and provides analysis and discussion in five areas of reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension. Each section of the guide defines the skill; reviews the evidence from research; suggests implications for classroom instruction; describes proven strategies for teaching reading skills; and addresses frequently raised questions.”
The other day, I shared the “minority view” from the panel. This report makes no effort to address that viewpoint or the issues contained therein.
To that end, we special education teachers in California must internalize this information to prepare us for the RICA test. Yet, as I read it, I find that its recommendations leave out about 40% of the human population - those, like me, who are Gestalt Language Processors (GLP).
For GLPs, no mention is to be found anywhere in the publication. Teacher preparation makes no mention that there is more than one way humans learn learn language. The majority view is taken as gospel, and forced upon teachers. When their students struggle, the system deems them disabled / dysfunctional and assign various remedies in hopes of “curing” their problems and returning them to a proper order.
Like me, these students will struggle in such a system. Some, like me, will leave school functionally illiterate. A few, like me, will happen upon therapies that will bring them into some sort of literacy. Most will not be so fortunate.
This is the basic use case behind my next book project - a guide to teaching literacy in GLP populations, of which non-verbal autistic people are a large part.
Learning and Reading
Learning and Reading
Learning and Reading
As I prepare to take what is (hopefully) the last of the standardized tests that I must pass to continue to teach in California (RICA), one of the test-prep vendors recommended that their students read a 2001 publication titled, “Put Reading First: The Research Building Blocks for Teaching Children To Read. Kindergarten through Grade 3.”
Here’s the synopsis: “The understanding of "what works" in reading is dynamic and fluid, subject to ongoing review and assessment through serious research. While there are no easy answers or quick solutions for optimizing reading achievement, an extensive knowledge base now exists to show people the skills children must learn in order to read well. This guide, designed by teachers for teachers, begins the process of compiling the findings from scientifically based research in reading instruction, a body of knowledge that will continue to grow over time. The guide, designed by teachers for teachers, summarizes what researchers have discovered about how to successfully teach children to read. It describes the findings of the National Reading Panel Report and provides analysis and discussion in five areas of reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension. Each section of the guide defines the skill; reviews the evidence from research; suggests implications for classroom instruction; describes proven strategies for teaching reading skills; and addresses frequently raised questions.”
The other day, I shared the “minority view” from the panel. This report makes no effort to address that viewpoint or the issues contained therein.
To that end, we special education teachers in California must internalize this information to prepare us for the RICA test. Yet, as I read it, I find that its recommendations leave out about 40% of the human population - those, like me, who are Gestalt Language Processors (GLP).
For GLPs, no mention is to be found anywhere in the publication. Teacher preparation makes no mention that there is more than one way humans learn learn language. The majority view is taken as gospel, and forced upon teachers. When their students struggle, the system deems them disabled / dysfunctional and assign various remedies in hopes of “curing” their problems and returning them to a proper order.
Like me, these students will struggle in such a system. Some, like me, will leave school functionally illiterate. A few, like me, will happen upon therapies that will bring them into some sort of literacy. Most will not be so fortunate.
This is the basic use case behind my next book project - a guide to teaching literacy in GLP populations, of which non-verbal autistic people are a large part.