Return-Path: <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g1BJFlu03303; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:15:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:15:47 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3C6808FE.D82122EC@webster.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Jeri Levesque <levesqjr@webster.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-family@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-FAMILY:744] Re: Budget Request for Even Start X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: multipart/alternative; X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 (Macintosh; I; PPC) Status: O Content-Length: 7085 Lines: 117 --------------03EB16DEDE2134EA46DCDDEB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tony, Thank you for the excellent information regarding Even Start budget reductions. I had a meeting with Susan Neuman and the subject of family literacy came up. She was not at all enthusiastic about family literacy. Dr. Neuman was very clear in her criticism of Even Start that the program had yet to show "meaningful" outcomes associated with early childhood education. She is fully committed to the Read First program goals and believes that the program design of family literacy appears to lack a focus on direct instruction--especially in the areas of language development and emerging literacy. We asked about the possibility of family literacy programs as venues for the Early Read First projects. She expressed concern here - noting that only "centers for excellence that promote cognitive development" would be considered. She was highly skeptical that Even Start programs qualified here, "Taxpayers deserve results," Legislators need solid evidence that the Early Childhood Education component of Even Start is supportive of the Read First agenda. We need quantitative findings that demonstrate progress toward the first National Education Goal. Please recall a study conducted nearly twenty years ago that criticized America's schools for not effectively promoting good reading instruction. The title of that report, "Becoming a Nation of Readers" (Anderson, et al) concluded with a warning that if educators could not determine how to teach children to read the task would be left open to politicians. As a profession, we need to analyze family literacy programs and identify clear literacy learning outcomes that result from sustained engagement with intense program components. As demonstrated by the slate of nominees for the National Institute for Literacy Board -- the Bush administration perceives family literacy from the perspective of how these programs effect the learning outcomes of young children. If family literacy advances the national education agenda we need to inform Congress how it works and at what cost it works best. We need to show literacy learning outcomes if we expect Congress and the President to "show us the money." I believe this was the Honorable Senator William Goodlings' final request to those attending the 2000 NCFL Annual Conference. In response to this new era of high stakes reading concerns, I am visiting each of Missouri's Even Start programs in a search for best practices. I am asking the staffs to show me what works best - then share their early childhood test scores, informal language and literacy assessment data, school based reading scores, and evidence of progress. These findings will be tied to research on language development and emerging literacy instruction. I am trying to ensure that program accomplishments are documented and included in the local evaluation reports. If reading is what really "matters most", and is the first concern of lawmakers, and if it is a critical attribute of comprehensive family literacy programs, then it is up to our field to get this message to the public. I hope never again to see family literacy on a list of programs with "good intentions but failed to deliver educational results." Jeri Levesque, Ed.D. Associate Professor, Webster University Project Director, Missouri Statewide Family Literacy Initiative --------------03EB16DEDE2134EA46DCDDEB Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> Tony, <p>Thank you for the excellent information regarding Even Start budget reductions. I had a meeting with Susan Neuman and the subject of family literacy came up. She was not at all enthusiastic about family literacy. Dr. Neuman was very clear in her criticism of Even Start that the program had yet to show "meaningful" outcomes associated with early childhood education. She is fully committed to the Read First program goals and believes that the program design of family literacy appears to lack a focus on <u>direct instruction</u>--especially in the areas of language development and emerging literacy. We asked about the possibility of family literacy programs as venues for the Early Read First projects. She expressed concern here - noting that only "centers for excellence that promote cognitive development" would be considered. She was highly skeptical that Even Start programs qualified here, "Taxpayers deserve results," <p>Legislators need solid evidence that the Early Childhood Education component of Even Start is supportive of the Read First agenda. We need quantitative findings that demonstrate progress toward the first National Education Goal. Please recall a study conducted nearly twenty years ago that criticized America's schools for not effectively promoting good reading instruction. The title of that report, "Becoming a Nation of Readers" (Anderson, et al) concluded with a warning that if educators could not determine how to teach children to read the task would be left open to politicians. <p>As a profession, we need to analyze family literacy programs and identify clear literacy learning outcomes that result from sustained engagement with intense program components. As demonstrated by the slate of nominees for the National Institute for Literacy Board -- the Bush administration perceives family literacy from the perspective of how these programs effect the learning outcomes of young children. If family literacy advances the national education agenda we need to inform Congress how it works and at what cost it works best. We need to show literacy learning outcomes if we expect Congress and the President to "show us the money." I believe this was the Honorable Senator William Goodlings' final request to those attending the 2000 NCFL Annual Conference. <p>In response to this new era of high stakes reading concerns, I am visiting each of Missouri's Even Start programs in a search for best practices. I am asking the staffs to show me what works best - then share their early childhood test scores, informal language and literacy assessment data, school based reading scores, and evidence of progress. These findings will be tied to research on language development and emerging literacy instruction. I am trying to ensure that program accomplishments are documented and included in the local evaluation reports. If reading is what really "matters most", and is the first concern of lawmakers, and if it is a critical attribute of comprehensive family literacy programs, then it is up to our field to get this message to the public. I hope never again to see family literacy on a list of programs with "good intentions but failed to deliver educational results." <p>Jeri Levesque, Ed.D. <br>Associate Professor, Webster University <br>Project Director, Missouri Statewide Family Literacy Initiative</html> --------------03EB16DEDE2134EA46DCDDEB--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:40:55 EST