Why I've Decided That the DRA Just Isn't Good

Maybe the title of this post could have been differently worded, but it's not. I think that the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), compared to other diagnostics, is decent (not worth something like $250 per kit), but is ultimately just another stupid diagnostic. Why have I come to this decision? It's rather simple actually.

I like to read. Reading is great, there is nothing better than a good book. I don't really care if it's a popular book, a bargain bin book, a book for kids, whatever, it's all good. Some I'll hate, but most are at least somewhat enjoyable.

Now, what the DRA is all about is this little books that are at reading levels. You have this box full of these 16 page books for students to read and respond to. The DRA instructions basically say that for the teacher to fully understand the results, that they should have read the book as well.

16 pages don't sound like much, but trust me, it's beyond brutal. I've always maintained more than a touch of selective ADD, when stuff doesn't interest me, I just shut down. I can't read these DRA books, it's impossible. I honestly don't know how my students get through them. They're poorly written, there's little to no attention to actual, you know, story telling.

So when your school district adopts the DRA, and hands you your first kit, try to read those books. You are truly a champion if you can pull it off, because they're not good. It goes against everything I believe about literacy instruction, basically, that it should be interesting to read. Think about it.

Pleasure Reading and My Boring Research

I'm doing some classroom based research for a graduate course right now, actually I'm putting the finishing touches on the study, but the point of it is to try to better understand how No Child Left Behind and the political pressures have affected the pleasure of reading for students and how they perceive themselves as successful learners.

It's been real interesting, and oddly enough, I'm not totally surprised by the findings. I'm looking at things from a few different angles, including socio-economic status and how it unfolds regarding literary success, and how reading level influences the enjoyment one gets from reading.

Of course, there's millions of teachers out there who know the answer to those questions, but I am tying them further in to No Child Left Behind. One of the more telling articles I came across was actually in The Washington Post and is nearly three years old. That article is titled Odds Stacked Against Pleasure Reading and in it, high school students talk about how much they enjoy reading and how much they hate 'reading class' at school. It's so true, and it's something I think about everyday.

How to Make Sure Your Students Will Hate Reading

OK, now you have your first teaching job, or you've been teaching forever and are looking for new ideas. The whole point of this post is to tell a few of the things that teachers can do that will totally turn their students off on reading. When you're teaching literacy, the main question you should ask yourself is why you're doing it. What do you want the students to get out of it? When I ask myself this question, the answer is always 'I teach reading because I want my students to enjoy reading and gain reading skill.' When I say 'gain reading skill,' I don't mean 'answer test questions.'

So there, that's a start. Now, if you want your students to hate reading, your answer to that questions should go something like; 'I teach reading so my students will score better on the test.' There are variations on this, but it comes down to a focus on skills and strategies.

Here's some great things to do in your classroom if you really want to cultivate their hatred of reading:

• Never let them choose what they read.
• Use textbooks, 100% all the time.
• Use test practice materials as much as you possibly can. Yell at them if they don't do well.
• 3 words: basal, basal, basal
• Use worksheets constantly. Especially those great language arts ones, where they diagram sentences and find the verbs. You'd be surprised how quickly your students will not only hate reading but writing as well, you can kill two birds with one stone in this manner.
• When you do read alouds, make sure the books are in no way connected to their lives or interests, just pick books because you've used them before and you have a lot of materials (like worksheets) to give them.
• When students work in groups, make them do the same tasks every single time.
• Never, NEVER read silently to yourself while your students read silently. The last thing they need is a good model of how to read independently.
• Taking the previous example one step further, never stop while reading to the class to interject something, and never purposefully make a mistake that students can catch and correct.

This is a start. If you can do at least a few of these things, then you'll very quickly have a class full of non-readers. Good luck!

Forced Into Doing Something Idiotic?

It's the question that applies to 100% of all teachers in this country. At one point or another (sometimes at all points), we're forced into some kind of program, whether it's a literacy program, a test-practice program, or a math program, that is completely idiotic and hasn't been thought out very well.

I live and work in New Mexico, which, needless to say, means that I am VERY familiar with idiotic ideas in education. I could be talking about many things right now, but mainly I'm talking about the Response to Intervention model that is currently a dark cloud hanging over our schools(you can Google it yourself if you'd like more information, because I don't want to provide a link that is completely one-sided in its definition and explanation of RTI).

Here is precisely what Response to Intervention is:

Everyday, for 40 minutes (longer in some places), students are pooled in to homogeneous groupings (groups of students at similar skill levels, so all the high kids are together, lows together, etc). In these groups, the teachers have to design some interventions that will serve the students. Since this is reality, and not some superintendents wet dream, the interventions have quickly turned to 40 minutes of daily test taking strategies.

It's supposedly mainly an intervention model that focuses on literacy components. However, intervening on students in no need of the intervention is not just a head scratcher, it's absolutely moronic. Now, I'm sure that some schools out there have appropriately implemented the model to only address those students who 'need it,' but now we've stumbled into a new area of debate.

The struggling student, many times a student with special needs, has obviously, OBVIOUSLY, become the plague of schools across the nation, because they hold down test scores (called Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP). Response to Intervention was crafted to serve these students. Before RTI, many schools would just pull these students out of science or social studies instruction (because who needs those? I'm not joking, I have literally been told that social studies doesn't help on the test, so it's not important) and work on reading strategies more. This is problematic for a number of reasons.

First, social studies and science are important disciplines, especially at a younger age. When educators make the error of assuming that literacy instruction is isolated to some sort of 'reading block,' or must be done in a certain way, they are taking away the power of differentiated and cross-curricular instruction. Done correctly, science and social studies are extremely valuable literary subject areas, especially for the struggling student, who is also at risk for being the bored student.

Second, well, I think I just said it. The struggling student is at risk for being the bored student. If we pull them out for 40 more minutes of test taking strategies, echo reading, and comprehension testing from isolated passages and short stories that they connect to in no way, then they'll just hate it even more.

So, have you been forced into doing something idiotic? I'm going to make a new label titled 'forced into something?', as well as 'teaching the test,' and will put similar posts under those labels so that this discussion can be furthered in the future. I realize this blog is new and doesn't have many readers as of yet, but if you come across this post and a light bulb goes off in your head, let me know what you're thinking or what's happening where you work, and we can discuss that a little more as well.