Update & Clarification: SBRR Criteria & Reading First by G.Reid Lyon

Dr. G. Reid Lyon received his Ph.D. from the University of New Mexico with a dual concentration in psychology and special education. He served as a faculty member of Northwestern University and the University of Vermont. He has practical experience as a learning disabilities teacher, third grade classroom teacher, and school psychologist for 12 years in the public schools.

Perhaps Reid Lyon is best known for his role as a research psychologist and an advisor to President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush on child development and education research and policies  He was one of the architects of Reading First – a Federal legislative initiative to improve reading in grades K through 3.   He recently resigned his position as the Chief of the Child Development and Behavior Branch within the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the National Institute of Health to take a position with Best Associates as a senior vice president for research and evaluation.

In his new position, Dr. Lyon will help develop innovative approaches for the American College of Education, a national teacher’s college that will train teachers and administrators to use the most current scientifically-based educational methodologies. Courses began this fall.

He is also helping to develop Whitney International University, part of GlobalEd’s mission to create high-quality institutions in key regions of the world and making private postsecondary education more available to all qualified students. Curriculum will focus on relevant professional, technical, and practical training and education that prepares students to successfully enter the workforce.

Part 2

I have never nor will I endorse a program

Q. By now we’re familiar with the questions that you’ve answered regarding how kids learn to read, why some don’t, how this can be prevented, and how best to remediate those who weren’t reached early enough. What particular instructional programs do you endorse in order for teachers to implement what you’ve learned through your research?

A. I have never nor will I endorse a program. What I do know is:

1. No one program is equally beneficial for all kids.
2. Combinations of programs work frequently work better than one program alone.
3. The value of any program is data driven and based on its impact on kids.
4. The teacher is one of the most critical factors in how well kids learn. For example, if a teacher implements a good strong program but finds that some kids do not respond, then that teacher must assess why the poor response, and how instruction can be bolstered to ensure that the youngster understands the concepts.

Characteristics of good programs

My research and others found that there are particular characteristics of good programs. They’re comprehensive and based upon substantial converging evidence that learning to read, for example, is complex and requires the learning and integration of phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, reading fluency, and reading comprehension strategies.

Effective programs nurture the kinds of instructional interactions that develop these skills with professional development provided to teachers so they can monitor response to instruction, modify instruction if needed, and implement the programs with fidelity.

What we originally wanted in Reading First was that if you want to buy a program with federal money, it should have gone through clinical trials to be sure it is effective. But there weren’t enough programs that went through that level of rigor; so many programs would be screened out and only a limited number of programs would be available. The Department of Education made the decision to make the criteria more general. Programs had to be comprehensive and the instructional interactions must be based upon principles supported by converging scientific evidence. It is important to note that we designed Reading First so that it would also stimulate publishers and program developers to develop and test programs scientifically to ensure their effectiveness. This is a very slow culture change, but there is some indication that the major publishers are beginning to move in this direction.

If kids do not learn in measurable ways, then the program needs to be replaced or modified

Q. What is your opinion of Reading Recovery? Guided Reading? Do these
instructional methods adequately cover phonics? Is there a place for direct instruction
in addressing literacy in the school system?

A. Everything I do comes from my scientific training. Any program that is comprehensive that results in increased student achievement should be implemented. The key points are Comprehensive and Effective. Problems stem from the implementation of many programs. A comprehensive program includes phonemic awareness; phonics; fluency; background knowledge; and comprehension, and is based on scientific principals. So the question we need to ask is what level of professional development is needed to implement a program with fidelity? Can the district provide that? Can we cover the expense of the program? Is it cost effective?

With Reading Recovery, as with any reading program, one would want to make sure that the evidence for its effectiveness is obtained through independent sources and contains information about kids who benefited from the program as well as those that did not benefit. Everything should be based on whether there is value-added in terms of student achievement. If kids do not learn in measurable ways, then the program needs to be replaced or modified.

We know that the content of a program is only as good as how instruction is provided. We have found time and again that the students with the most significant reading problems require instruction that is direct, systematic, focused, and based upon the most current scientific evidence available

The most effective form of instruction must be clear, systematic and explicit

What do we know about kids who are struggling? What is the most effective form of instruction? Again, it must be clear, systematic and explicit. Kids shouldn’t be guessing from pictures or from context. The program should be well scaffolded with new information being linked explicitly with concepts already learned. If kids are asked to guess words they don’t pronounce well…by looking at a picture or reading around the word using context, those aren’t strong strategies at all. Good readers don’t use surrounding context, they use decoding skills to figure out words. Context is used to confirm if it makes sense. We are “here”, but I also can” hear”. Many programs continue to use guessing or “cueing” strategies as the primary tactic to decode unknown words. Unfortunately the converging evidence indicates that this is an inefficient and counter productive instructional element.

Every teacher of reading should know all the principles were talking about

Every teacher of reading should know all the principles were talking about. The more difficulty a kid has, the more explicit instruction needs to be. I can’t say it enough. Whether you are teaching phonemic awareness or comprehension strategies, instruction needs to be direct, systematic and comprehensive. Direct instruction is absolutely critical. But it is critical to keep in mind that students must learn ALL reading skills to be able to understand what they read – the goal of reading instruction. To be sure, learning and applying phonics skills absolutely necessary - non negotiable - but it is not sufficient. You can have the best phonics skills in the world, but if you can’t apply the skills quickly and accurately – that is fluently – you will get bored and will not be able to remember what you just read. Many kids can read words quickly and accurately but lack the vocabulary to understand the content. You get the picture – learning to read is very complex and requires comprehensive programs and teachers who know why the programs must be comprehensive. 
 

Articles in this Complete Series Include:

1. Shifting the focus to Effective Instruction
2. Effective Reading Programs Share Common Characteristics
3. The Federal role in Education
4. Getting Beyond Polarization of Bilingual Methods
5. Developing an American College of Education