@Pgogy We are submitting for the Festival of Learning BC confernece: https://bccampus.ca/event/festival-of-learning-2020/ I may do a similar session for #oer20 but already submitting @goifoundation for that conference
@specialtechie I use my website. I put my annual report up there https://jgregorymcverry.com/annualreport2019 and a to do list: https://jgregorymcverry.com/todolist for teachers and schools I built @reviewalentFS which has a goal setting feature
@tashclarke73 Wow just read the project!! Love the idea one thing I want to encourage government orgs to do is just provide domains and hosting to residence. Build in the digital infrastructure and see what happens.
@jgmac1106 To be fair that was before I saw the news. Can't lie...I kinda want a narwhal sword now. https://twitter.com/jgmac1106/status/1200798527506526211
So when people say "we need to stop teaching skills and do more explicit phonics.." they sometimes mean strategy instruction around vocabulary and comprehension which can not be taught to automaticity. I also saw "factor" being used two ways
@SaraJPeden I will. It was late on Thanksgiving and citations didn't fit in tweets. Will need to write a blog post. All back versions of Handbook on Reading Research openly released. Good place to start .
@davidbraze was Just citing much of your NIH vocabulary work when I was pointing out saying "science of reading" while basing definition of reading on an SVR model is by defintion an oxymoron.
@EBLIreads The role of knowledge, followed by vocabulary (though often vocabulary used as proxy for knowledge in many studies) in predicting comprehension is one of the most stable results in reading research over last 50 years.
That being said when students have language goals strategy instruction has more lasting and bigger effect sizes as these also map to general thinking skills whoxh is why Palinscar and Brown settled on Question, Clarify, Summarize and Predict.
@DoctorSam7 that would be my take away from Rosenshine's meta analysis: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00346543064004479 strategy instruction has moderate to strong effects but stronger the reader lower effect size and you hit ceiling quick.
Also model that consistently been shown to explain less variance than other attempts to model comprehension. Put "simple view of reading model" in Google scholar, almost all studies w/ empirical evidence (Gough & Tunmer had none) do not support
I think my current definition (and I borrow heavily from Gee; Leander and Knobel, Snow) Active process of encoding and decoding meaning on the world through agentive participation in different discourses and communities
Terms of theoretical models of reading, Snow's reader, text, activity...all situated in socio-historical context, probably least nuaseating of current bunch. Watch #lra19 hashtag..I will ask around for other models...but SVR...not accepted science
In the thread, granted it branched many ways so i could have lost meaning, some meant facotr in the more "pedestrian" sense and others in the more modeling of comprehension sense. Since folks talking research important to agree on these definitions
But I pretty much agree with folks that most commercial programs, Caulkins, F+P Guided Reading, are nonsense..nor am I fan of self selected readers workshop, mainluy because teachers need to know books to teach them well, can't know 25 at once.
true story take son on field trip to farm. Take picture of license plate on wall depicting purchasing of land and say this is how racism gets reinforced... Out comes the matriarch of farm, wonderful woman explains that what GG grandfather
Yet we also know phonics instruction we have to do "whole class" as when teachers try to individualize...the whole class control out performs. So now with Fundations.....my kid stuck drawing letters in air and studying digraphs he has long mastered
Just calling it "Science of Reading" is proof enough... Who would be against science? Just those ignorant brainwashed teachers, that's who... Yet scratch surface and you find it is a very limited survey (or disproven like SVR) view of science