Dr. Billy Molasso, Executive Director of RRCNA, discusses RR and how research demonstrates that it really works: An interview conducted by Dr. Sam Bommarito
Dr. Billy Molasso is the Director of RRCNA. In this interview, he talks about various issues dealing with Reading Recovery. He focuses on dispelling misinformation and myths about RR, which are currently being presented by the folks supporting the social media version of the Science of Reading. The facts are that Reading Recovery is research-based and has decades of research demonstrating that it works Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE). Billy knows about that firsthand since he is the parent of a reading recovery child.
Let’s now look at the questions Billy dealt with during this interview.
In the past few months, I’ve discussed how many researchers and others have been pushing back against the social media version of the Science of Reading LINK, LINK. Billy Molasso has been prominent among those folks. On the one hand, the positive effects of RR on students are well-documented LINK. However, when a study was published indicating that the long-term effects were negative, Billy stepped in and questioned that study’s conclusions. He pointed out that particular study had a very high attrition rate. The final conclusions are based on only 25% of the total number of students in the study. I wrote a blog around what Billy had to say on that point LINK. That blog also talked about what others were saying about the misdirections and misunderstandings being promoted by the incomplete story told by some social media pundits.
I have written about the positive effects of RR many times LINK, LINK,LINK. I was trained in RR, taught RR, and found that the training has been invaluable to me throughout my education career. The Professional Development aspect of RR is sometimes overlooked, but it is powerful. RR-trained teachers learn various methods to help children (and yes that includes the various ways to teach phonics). RR-trained teachers are a valuable asset to any district. In the interview about her book Rubies in the Rubble, Jill Speering reported that the same folks who were trying to end a RR program at her district were concurrently trying to encourage teachers from that program to stay with the district because of the extensive literacy training those teachers had.
Let’s remember that RR isn’t for every student, but for those who it fits, it carries out its main function. That is to accelerate those students to catch up with the students in their building. When that happens, and the building has a working tier-one program, the effects of RR remain for the long term. Susan Vincent reported that fact in an interview I did with her LINK.
Recovery works. Recovery-trained teachers are an asset. Recovery has helped tens of thousands of children worldwide. I urge all educators to resist the attempt by some folks to eliminate their competition by outlawing recovery. Doing so will create a monopoly. Monopolies never help consumers. I hope everyone keeps all this in mind as we create legislation around the issue of how to teach reading. Thanks for listening.
Happy Reading and Writing.
Dr. Sam Bommarito (aka, the guy in the middle taking flak from all sides)
BTW more interviews coming up, including Jan Richardson, Gravity Goldberg and, later this summer P.D. Pearson
Copyright 2023 by Dr. Sam Bommarito. Views/interpretations expressed here are solely this author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person or organization.
A Father’s Day essay by guest blogger Joseph S. Pizzo. Thanks to Joe for sharing this wonderful piece- Dr. Sam
Happy Father’s Day to everyone. This weekend I’m taking a break from talking about literacy issues. I’ve invited a guest blogger Joseph S. Pizzo to share this tribute to his father. I think the things he says will ring true for all of us as we think about our own fathers. I guess sooner or later all of us become the best parts of our dad. Happy Father’s Day to all, most especially to my own dad the late Sam Bommarito Senior. Dr. Sam
Becoming My Dad
Author: Joseph S. Pizzo
Dad, as you know, when I was growing up, my goal in life was to play center field for the New York Yankees. When I realized that athletically I didn’t possess the gifts to accomplish that dream, I thought about being a disc jockey on the radio. I knew all of the music, and I would listen to and imitate the way show hosts Cousin Brucie, Casey Kasem, and Dan Ingram would read ad copy, chat with the listening audience, and add luster to their introductions to the music of Elvis, Chuck Berry, Sam Cooke, and more. I would put in my single ear plug on my hand-held six-transistor radio and lose myself in these shows. However, as you know, Dad, I was a shy kid who was awkward socially. How could I, the kid who once was standing next to future Hall of Famer Phil Rizutto in a hallway in Yankee Stadium and despite mom’s encouragement to say hello was too timid to do so, ever think that I could be a disc jockey? Being gregarious is a non-negotiable requirement for a radio host.
Dad, our family has always believed strongly in divine intervention. I may have lacked the talent to be a professional athlete and the poise and confidence to be a dynamic radio personality, but somehow I had the yet-to-be-discovered ability to be just like the greatest gentleman I have ever known: you, Dad. I believe that God understood the fact that I was a handful of clay, and the artist I needed to inspire me to mold myself into a finished piece of art was you. God made you my dad so you could be my role model. All I had to do was to pay attention to the way you comported yourself and the joy you always seemed to inspire in the hearts of everyone who knew you.
Dad, you always spoke in a gentle, soothing voice that was filled with richness. You were kind, generous, understanding, and always approachable. Even with your quiet nature that rarely was replaced with anger, you were gregarious. I remember going to the bank or the store or even to the gas station with you, and you were sure to be greeted by more than one individual who made the effort to stop whatever they were doing so they could chat with you. Their faces would all burst into smiles, and there was a sincerity to the respect that you would always receive. You took a genuine interest in everyone, and you chose to focus on the goodness that each of them harbored in their hearts. You encouraged everyone you met by making them feel that they each were the most important person alive. You were a best friend, a confidant, and a problem solver to all who were fortunate to know you.
Dad, you somehow always knew when I was struggling with an issue or a problem. You never demanded that I tell you what was wrong. You never told me that I shouldn’t worry. Your wisdom allowed you to know that these two strategies would have a very small chance to be successful. Instead, you would pat me on the shoulder and let me know that you would always be there to help me if I ever needed your help or advice. You empowered me to decide what direction I would take. You would then pat me on the shoulder again and reassure me that you were proud of me.
You know that I was always a perfectionist. Things had to be just so. You taught me that there was another way to deal with things. Dad, you helped me to realize that not everything that I do has to be perfect. You taught me to deal only with the issues and situations that could actually be changed without compromising my beliefs. Moreover, you showed me that complaining about things was not worth the energy that it took to do so. When I would spill a bowl of ice cream or drop a glass on the floor, you would help me to clean up the mess while never scolding me. You gave me the benefit of the doubt. I am so deeply grateful for the trust that you always placed in me. Author Alex Haley vowed always to “Find the good, and praise it.” In fact, he had that phrase engraved at the bottom of every piece of his stationery. Dad, you had the phrase etched deeply into your heart, and you have engraved that same phrase into my heart.
You are a great man, Dad. You made sure that you treated with a strong sense of genuine caring and concern, all who were fortunate enough to know you. Even though you have passed away more than twenty-five years ago, I don’t allow one day to pass when I am not thanking God that he sent me to you and Mom. I don’t know if I shall ever have the beauty in my soul that you possessed. Even so, I shall continue to strive toward achieving that goal. You served as the perfect role model. You accomplished the things that I continue to work at every day. You have given me the perfect map to continue to overcome my shyness while I treat everyone with kindness, generosity, and understanding. I shall always try to remember to be approachable to anyone who might need a smile or the chance to share a story of their own success. I shall give my best effort to be reasonably encouraging to everyone I meet while placing the spotlight on them rather than myself.
Dad, I realize that my dream of playing centerfield for the New York Yankees is a memory rather than a wish, and I know that I am a bit too old to be hosting a pop music show. Even so, I have been a middle school classroom teacher who shall be starting his 50th year in the classroom in November. I have found the confidence to teach public speaking and deliver speeches and professional development workshops. I may not be broadcasting live on my own radio program, but I have created a couple of podcasts that allow me to chat with authors, teach poetry, review interesting books, discuss educational issues, and even help a friend when he needs some copy read as a public service announcement or a commercial advertisement. I have been told that my voice has a richness and a comforting sound. Without any hesitation, I immediately smile and say, “I have been blessed with my dad’s voice.” It is the confidence that you have instilled in me that gives me the confidence to take reasonable chances and to greet everyone with your sense of dignity and level of interest.
Thank you, Dad, for the valuable lessons you have taught me.
Thank you, Dad, for the patience that you have shown me that now serves as my foundation as I am attempting to build my own legacy.
Thank you, Dad, for being the role model you continue to be in my life.
I am proud to say that even though this journey still has many more steps for me to take, I am finally becoming you, Dad. Thank you for your inspiration. I hope I can make you and Mom even more proud of me before I leave this earth.
Author’s Note:
I am an Integrated Language Arts teacher of 49 years at Black River Middle School in Chester, NJ and an Adjunct Professor at Centenary University in Hackettstown, NJ. Because of the kindness and support with which my dad inspired me, I have gained the confidence to invest in others while creating a synergy of positive goodness in my students and my colleagues. The pride that I take in my students’ accomplishments is similar to that which my dad always took in my accomplishments. I strive to make him and my mom proud every day.
A middle-school English teacher in his 49th year, Joseph Pizzo teaches at the Black River Middle School and has served as an Adjunct Professor at Centenary University since 1992. Pizzo has been the Educator of the Year for AMLE, NJCTE, NJAMLE, and NJ S.H.I.N.E and a member of the WWOR-TV Ch. 9’s A+ for Teachers Hall of Fame. This former NCTE Historian, present member of the NCTE Children’s Poetry Book Award Committee and AMLE’s Early Career Educator and Teacher Leader Committees, he is the former president and current Executive Board member of NJCTE, NJAMLE, and the NJ Autism Think Tank. Pizzo has taught at Union County College and College of St. Elizabeth, is a NJ Schools to Watch Core Leadership Team member, and a podcaster of A Writer’s Journey,A Spot of Poetry, and We Have Issues.
Here is a link to Dr. Pizzo’s weekly podcasts LINK.
About Literacy Instruction- A Letter to the New York Times.
Note: A shortened version of this letter has been submitted to the Times. It was shortened in order to meet the word count criteria.
To whom it may concern,
I have been in education for over five decades and have taught every grade from Kindergarten to Graduate school. I currently work as an education consultant and write a weekly blog about literacy. One important thing I have learned all this time is that what works with one child doesn’t always work with another. One size fits all solutions have never faired well. Yet recent articles and podcasts by the Times seem to support the notion that the social media version of Science of Reading has found such a solution and that folks like Lucy Calkins have done more harm than good. That makes for great public relations, especially for companies selling the alleged silver bullets. However, it is based on very bad science. It is bad science because it is incomplete science. It is bad science because it fails to consider all the research.
First, many top researchers have challenged the notion that it’s all settled science and that a silver bullet is ready for use. These researchers include P.D. Pearson, George G. Hruby, Rachel Gabriel, P.L. Thomas and Amanda Goodwin. Goodwin is the current co-editor of the prestigious Reading Research Quarterly. In a recent interview, she said
“But their RRQ article, Donna Scanlon, and Kimberly Anderson review 25 years of rigorous experimental studies in which kids were given systematic phonics instruction and also taught to use context cues to help them when they struggle to sound out words. And they found that kids tend to become more successful readers when they get both kinds of instruction, compared to those who get phonics alone. In short, they found that more resources are better. It’s self-defeating to insist on an either-or choice between phonics and context cueing, as though these practices were at war with each other. It’s much more helpful to treat them as complementary.”
By the way, one of the cornerstones of the social media version of SOR is to ban the use of context clues. That is part of their proposed ban on MSV. Please note that Goodwin is not saying to abandon systematic phonics. She is saying that kids need both systematic phonics and the problem-solving approach Scanlon and Anderson use.
Second is SOR’s notion that everything that has come before in literacy instruction has failed to work and must be replaced. Balanced literacy doesn’t work. Folks like Lucy Calkins are vilified. Some SOR advocates claim she and others like her are hurting kids. But look at all the research before buying into that. Tim Pressley just published the 5th edition of the book explaining and defending balanced literacy. That book contains much research-based evidence showing that Balanced Literacy can work and that it includes systematic phonics. Lucy has been incorrectly identified as the inventor of Balanced Literacy. The claim is made that Balanced Literacy teachers don’t teach phonics. It was actually the late Michael Pressley who invented the term Balanced Literacy. His son, Tim Pressley, just published the 5th edition of the book about Balanced Literacy. There is plenty of evidence in that book that claims of failure are simply not true. The SOR folks are taking on a strawman version of Balanced Literacy rather than trying to deal with the real thing. In addition, regarding successful teaching using workshop, the ink isn’t dry on research showing that workshop works before the attacks on the data start. The attacks discount and discredit studies using criteria for success that are much more stringent than those being used to judge the research supporting their stance.
Third, the research supporting their stance is equivocal. LTRS training is not even close to a cure-all, yet the research demonstrating that is ignored. For years, England has used synthetic phonics- the SOR fleet’s flagship-. Yet a recent landmark study found it is not working. P.D. Pearson, one of the top literacy researchers of all time, has said all the SOR folks have really demonstrated is the ability to improve performance on word list tests. When it comes to improving comprehension, they have simply been unable to demonstrate that. Comprehension is the Achilles heel of the social media SOR movement.
Fourth- the claims of success made by these SOR advocates in places like Florida and Mississippi have also been challenged. In a recent blog post-Diane, Ravitch explained how the NAEP scores are arbitrarily manipulated to uphold failure claims. Both she and P.L. Thomas have carried out work that shows the “miracle gains” in 3rd-grade reading scores disappear in later grades. These gains are partly due to the retention of 3rd graders, which temporarily boosts scores by removing them from the testing pool and giving them a second chance to take the test. Doing so actually hurts those students. The research shows they are more likely to drop out of high school. It also shows that kids who are not retained do just as well as the ones who are. Add to that the facts that it costs extra money to keep those kids in the system for one more year and that children of color are more likely to be retained. Given problems with the practice of using retention to raise scores, one must conclude it is a practice that should be ended. One more thing- Ravitch also points out that other improvements made in Mississippi, e.g., more funding, and smaller class sizes, may have played a significant role in raising the scores. Current reporting is silent on that point, giving credit only to using SOR.
In conclusion, why are we letting public relations spin doctors shape literacy policy while ignoring what major researchers have to say? For several years now, I have championed taking a centrist position. That means using the best of ALL sides. My position is rooted in P.D. Pearson’s idea of the “Radical Middle,” a position which he continues to develop. This is not a call to keep the old ways. It is, instead, a call to do something we’ve never done in the history of reading. Instead of listening to the folks on the extremes (phonics vs. no phonics), let’s adopt a middle-ground approach. Let’s use ALL the research, not just the research that sells particular phonics programs. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from recent events where taking a centrist position avoided a national calamity in the financial world. I’m calling on the Times and other media to report the whole story, not just the story the social media spin doctors want told. Let’s hear from folks like Pearson, Ravitch, Gabriel, P.L. Thomas, and others. Let’s take what they have to say more seriously. Perhaps then we can finally use ideas from all sides to stop pendulum swings in literacy discussions. Perhaps we can learn from one another. Dare to Dream.
Tim Pressley discusses the newest edition of Reading Instruction that Works-The Case for Balanced Teaching: An interview conducted by Dr. Sam Bommarito
We are fast approaching Father’s Day, and I believe Tim Pressley has honored his late father’s memory and work with the very best present of all. He co-authored the newest edition of Reading Instruction That Works (5th edition). Most folks know of his father, Michael Pressley. He is the creator of the idea of Balanced Literacy. Tim & his co-authors have continued his father’s legacy with a well-written, well-researched book that both carries on his father’s work and adapts it to the current landscape of literacy instruction.
Here is some information about Tim:
Tim Pressley, Ph.D., is an associate professor of psychology at Christopher Newport University and is a faculty member for the university’s master’s in teaching program and the Center for Education Research and Policy. He received his Ph.D. in Educational Psychology from Florida State University and has a background in elementary education. Before receiving his Ph.D., Dr. Pressley was an elementary school teacher, a driving force behind his research. His current research focuses on teachers’ lives, specifically the impact of COVID-19 on teachers, teacher effectiveness, and teacher burnout. His work has been published in Educational Researcher, Teaching and Teacher Education, School Psychology, and The Teacher Educator.
Additionally, he has co-authored the most recent edition of Reading Instruction that Works: The Case for Balanced Teaching. He is currently co-authoring a book focused on K-12 schools post-COVID-19 (coming late 2023/early 2024). He hopes his research gives teachers a voice on aspects impacting teacher’s lives.
Interviewing Tim was a genuine pleasure. He presents us with the real version of Balanced Literacy. He notes that his goal in this book is to update the book’s research and make the book more teacher friendly. He has succeeded in doing both. Balanced Literacy is so much more than just promoting a love of books. Tim’s explanation of the book’s content clarifies that Balanced Literacy is nothing like the strawman version of BL often given by folks attacking BL. In this newest edition, Tim outlines how Balanced Literacy includes the direct and explicit teaching of phonics and provides a complete and systematic look at how comprehension can be taught. Every chapter of the book includes great teaching practices and recent research backing up those practices. It documents the fact that Balanced Literacy (Balanced Teaching) not only works but also involves teaching children in a way that they get the instruction that fits their particular needs. He calls special attention to the newest chapter in the book. It is Chapter 9, Reading Instruction for Emergent Bilinguals, by Ana Taboada Barber. Tim is correct in his assessment that there is much new and valuable information in that chapter. Overall, this new edition of the book is both teacher-friendly and child friendly. As he notes in the interview, as a parent, he wants Balanced Literacy for his child as she grows up.
Here is a link to the YouTube interview:
Here are the talking points from the interview:
Here is a link to buying the book. When I bought my hard copy today, I also purchased the e-book copy. The cost to add the e-book is minimal. LINK
Tim is not trying to force his views on anyone. He is not trying to pass laws outlawing all competing practices. Instead, he is presenting educators and parents with effective ways to meet the needs of their students. Tim is leaving the decision on what practices to use to the teachers and administrators to make after reviewing the considerable research presented in each chapter. It is not the strawman version of Balanced Literacy presented in some newspapers and social media accounts. It is not a one size fits all answer. It is most definitely a research-based answer. As I’ve been saying for quite some time, consider all the research before deciding your best course of action around these issues.
Ending with Mary Howard’s Inspirational words
With all the meanness and vitriol plaguing the latest discussions on the best ways to teach reading, it was refreshing to hear a voice of reason like Tim’s. In addition to Tim, my very good friend and colleague, Mary Howard, had some things to say about the current literacy world situation. I hope everyone takes the time to listen to and follow her advice. It’s time for common sense and common ground in literacy discussion.
“We are at a crossroads, my friends. The world of Literacy is not doing well, and it needs us to give it a gentle nudge back to life.”
Mary Howard, June 2023
Here is the link to her full blog entry LINK. I think you will find Mary’s thoughts both moving and informative.
Happy Reading and Writing.
Dr. Sam Bommarito (aka, the guy in the middle taking flak from all sides)
Copyright 2023 by Dr. Sam Bommarito. Views/interpretations expressed here are solely this author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person or organization.
More Well-Known Researchers Push Back on the “Science of Reading” Claims- A blog post by Dr. Sam Bommarito
Let’s start with an announcement concerning last week’s post about Tierney and Pearson’s webinar LINK.
The recording of our #ILAWebinar Fact-Checking the “Science of Reading”: Claims, Assumptions, and Consequences presented by Rob Tierney and P. David Pearson is now available on demand.
You can still register for the event to get access to the recording.
This week we discover that Pearson is not alone in pushing back on the social media version of the Science of Reading. Let’s look at this article from the Washington Post. LINK.
Valerie Strauss indicates this article centers around the views of several educators and the post they created for the article.
Reinking, Smargorinsky, and Yaden are well-credentialed. Reinking is a former Editor of the Reading Research Quarterly. In the post they share in this article, they make several additional points about the issues of reading instruction, especially early reading instruction.
-Like Pearson, P.L. Thomas, and Andy Johnson, this group of researchers and teacher educators find no convincing evidence of a “reading crisis.” The fact is that since NAEP started tracking scores in 1972, the scores have remained mostly flat. The only significant drop came with the covid 19 shutdown of schools. They correctly point out that the drop came due to “societal factors.”
-They also point out that the claims that the NAEP scores demonstrate that 2/3 of students are not proficient in reading are misleading. See what Diane Ravitch, a former member of the NAEP board, had this to say on that claim:
-They make it clear that phonics is important. Still, they point out that the National Reading Panel, which is often cited to justify the switch to a phonics-dominated curriculum, actually called for a balanced approach to teaching reading. I hope every teacher, parent, educator, and researcher reading this post takes the time to read Chapter 2, page 97 of the NRP report. Phonics is not unimportant, but phonics is also not the real solution to today’s reading problems.
-Finally, the MANY things that might make a difference in improving the state of reading instruction are listed, with links to each item. The links are not active in the screen capture below but are active in the article. I hope I have piqued the reader’s interest enough to go back and look at the full article.
MY THOUGHTS ABOUT RECENT EVENTS AND THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE.
I’ve had a 50-plus-year career in education. I continue to do in-class push-ins, tutoring, and in-service for preservice teachers. I also write this weekly blog and have been asked to do several presentations at various reading conferences over the last year. My first blog on this topic came because I read posts by teachers who were forced to stop using practices and materials that were working and instead use “Science of Reading” materials and methods. The situation is getting worse instead of better. What is going on? I think what is going on is that one of the most effective public relations programs in the history of education has convinced many that nothing from the past ever worked, everything from the past must be gotten rid of, and everyone should be required to use the methods and materials from “structured literacy.” All else is forbidden. This is a reminder that structured literacy was a public relations term invented to promote a particular point of view. Please read this link for the details LINK. I have no problem with folks promoting structured literacy; I have HUGE problems with folks promoting it to the exclusion of everything else. The clear goal of this movement is to unseat the prevailing methods that have worked for many children and replace them with their own methods. The net effect of doing so would be the creation of a monopoly. The beneficiaries are not the children. The beneficiaries are the publishers, who are now getting the exclusive rights to sell the wares while others are being forced out of the competition. Is this really happening?
YES.
I recently had a long conversation with Michele Dufresne, the owner of a small publishing company. The name of the company is Pioneer Valley Books. Research supporting her company’s Literacy Footprints Guided Reading System programis strong LINK. She expects it to be listed in the What Works Clearinghouse as an effective literacy program. Yet because of the legislation being passed in many states, districts can no longer use her program. These are districts whose children were underperforming and who subsequently raised the scores and kept them at or above average. Her program worked. It worked well in the field. It helped the kids. Yet it is banned in many states because of the impact of the current public relations campaign. As I have demonstrated in my last two blogs, the total misinterpretation and misrepresentation of research is being called into question by top researchers in the reading field. Yet because of the effectiveness of current public relations campaigns, state legislators are choosing to listen to public relations gurus and spin doctors. They are ignoring what top researchers have had to say. Something is rotten in Denmark!
Michele’s company only employs about 100 employees. She’s already had to lay some off. Currently, the sales of her innovative program’s decodable books are keeping the company afloat. Wait a minute, Doctor Sam- this company also sells decodables? Of course, they do. Like many centrists, they use ideas from all sides as they go about the daily business of helping teachers and parents help kids. If there are sides to this issue, think about the stance taken by each side. The social media Science of Reading folks take a “my way or the highway stance”. They are fixing things so only their materials can be used. By contrast, the centrists embrace looking at ALL the research and using ALL the ideas. Yet even when research and field experience show those ideas really work, the newest public relations campaigns are driving them out of the field anyway. How is that right? Here is a simple reminder from a reading teacher of more than 50 years:
WHAT WORKS WITH ONE CHILD DOESN’T ALWAYS WORK WITH ANOTHER.
Let’s stop the madness. Let’s stop the formation of a monopoly in the literacy field. Let’s listen to the little guys when they devise things that work. Let’s not pull materials out of the hands of teachers when those materials are working. Let’s look at ALL THE RESEARCH and listen to ALL THE RESEARCHERS as we consider legislation. I’ll be revisiting all these issues from time to time this summer.
Most importantly, I’ll advocate for having BOTH analytic and synthetic phonics available so that each child can get the kind of phonics that helps them the most. That is something that has not always been the case, and this summer, I want to explore how we can change things so that that can happen. I have several interviews lined up, including an interview with David Pressley about his newest book on balanced literacy, Michelle Dufresne as she tells us more about her cautionary tale of the effects of the current PR campaign, and with P.D. Pearson at the end of the summer to hear more about what the radical middle has to say on these issues. It’s going to be a busy and interesting summer. Stay tuned, folks- lots of good things are coming!
Dr. Sam Bommarito (aka, the guy in the middle taking flak from all sides)
Copyright 2023 by Dr. Sam Bommarito. Views/interpretations expressed here are solely this author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person or organization.
I have just been invited to speak at the 2024 Wisconsin ILA convention. If you are interested in having me speak or present, contact me at bommariosam@yahoo.com
