[Reading-hall-of-fame] First of three messages from NCTQ (0

[Ken Goodman]

*A statement from members of the Reading Hall of Fame on the report of the *
*National Council on Teacher Quality**

As elected members of the Reading Hall of Fame with broad and diverse
perspectives on reading and reading instruction we want to raise strong
objections to key aspects of the NCTQ report on teacher preparation
programs.*

1.     The purpose of NCTQ is to *“**provide an alternative national voice
to existing teacher organizations and to build the case for a comprehensive
reform agenda that would challenge the current structure and regulation of
the profession.”* . NCTQ ‘s would control educatlon by limiting teaching to
set program, limiting teacher education to training teachers in that
program and eliminating the professional organizations which provide a
forum and a voice for teachers.

2.     NCTQ asserts that the National Reading Panel provided the answers to
, “*many fundamental **edu**cational questions*” and closed any open
questions about reading instruction.  We cannot accept that the fundamental
questions are answered. There still is need for research and debate within
the profession. Knowledge itself is being marginalized and those who pursue
knowledge declared irelevent.

3.     NCTQ reduced the NRP report to “five components of effective reading
instruction”. They then use teaching of these five to assess teacher
education program.  This would prepare teachers to be technicians with
limited knowledge and authority to provide appropriate instruction for
children with a wide range of abilities.

4.     The report of NCTQ repeats the misrepresentation in NCLB
characterizing current reading instruction as a war between two- and only
two- views of how reading should be taught: “Whole Language” and phonics
framed as  *scientifically-based reading instruction*.

5.

Robert Calfee* summarized the official Reading First evaluation: “ The
Report concludes,  ‘*Reading First* *did not produce a statistically
significant impact* on *student reading comprehension test scores*’ (
Gamse, et al., 2008. )An enormous investment of time and money demonstrated
the ineffectiveness of ideas and practices that many had challenged from
the beginning – *but nothing useful*
     NCTQ wants to limit reading education courses to training teachers in
the same methodology that was imposed through Reading First,  the reading
part of NCLB,  which failed to produce any significant results after
spending over six billion dolllars.* *

6.     Asserting that “*teacher educators choose **to train candidates in
“whole language” methods rather than scientifically-based reading
instruction*” indicates that NCTQ’s evaluators had so broad a definition of
whole language that it is anything other than what NCTQ would mandate.

7.      The texts authored by over 60 members of the Reading Hall of Fame
were listed as unacceptable by NCTQ. Few were rated acceptable. The issue
is not our texts. It is that anyone or any group can impose their judgment
and become arbiters of books or methods.

8.      NCTQ ridicules the view that prospective teachers should confront
their attitudes toward race, class, language and culture in their teacher
education programs. This is but one example of  NCTQ view that reading is
an autonomous skill that can be taught out of context without regard for
who the learners are and what they are asked to read.

9.     NCTQ sees “Academic Freedom run amok” in teacher education. Yet the
concept was created to protect teachers and other academics from just the
sort of political interference in their teaching and research NCTQ is
attempting.

 *This statement represents those members signed below and should not be
construed as an official position of the Reading Hall of Fame

 *Calfee R. *Knowledge, Evidence, and Faith: How the Federal Government
Used Science to Take Over Public Schools in Goodman K, R.Calfee and Y.
Goodman (eds)  Whose Knowledge Counts in Government Literacy Policies?
Routledge 2014)**

Please respond to Kgoodman at .arizona.edu by August 7, 2013.

Members signing this statement (to date)

Kenneth S Goodman     Professor emeritus University of Arizona

James Hoffman             Professor University of Texas

Jane Hanson                 Professor Emerita University of Virginia, Team
member, Central Virginia Writing Project












-- 
Ken Goodman
7814 South Galileo Lane
Tucson, Az 85747
520-745-6895

Use Google to see :
Ken Goodman's Morning post