Blogger “Lace to the Top” (aka Kevin Glynn) reports that Fountas and Pinnell have raised their expectations to align with the demands of the Common Core.
He also reports that the reading and assessment program DIBELS has raised its cut scores to align with the Common Core standards.
He writes:
Under the guise of Common Core, the cut scores for DIBELS have been changed. For instance, pre Common Core a 1st grader was expected to read 40-64 words per minute. Under the Common Core, they are now expected to read 69+ words per minute.
There is no money to be made in labeling children as successful, but labeling them failures has continued to fuel the perceived crisis in education and increases profits.
I am sure that DIBELS stands for something important, but I can’t find out by googling the website of the group at the University of Oregon who created the program and assessments.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literary Skills
LikeLike
DIBELS NEXT Assessment manual (2011) was authored by Roland H. Good III and Ruth A. Kaminski with Kelli Cummings, Chantal Dufour-Martel, Kathleen Petersen, Kelly Powell-Smith, Stephanie Stollar and Joshua Wallin.
While it was being researcherd the manual was available to download in 2011 and 2012.
The authors formed ‘Dynamic Measurement Group’ here’s the link that give more info on the products.
https://dibels.org/
LikeLike
Dynamic Measurement Group partners with- guess who? Amplify & Voyager/Sopris
https://dibels.org/partners.html
LikeLike
“There is no money to be made in labeling children as successful.” Well, there it is, huh? It would be a conspiracy except that it’s legal.
LikeLike
This is a terrible reading assessment given to kids. They must read, as fast as they can, a reading passage. The teacher counts how many errors they make like leaving out words, substituting words, or mispronouncing words. If a student reads the text slower, to gain comprehension, they will be marked down. The whole point of reading is to gain understanding of the text, and this assessment actually undermines that goal by teaching kids to read things as fast as they can. And, every kid in the class must be tested several times a year. What a waste of the teacher’s valuable time!
LikeLike
The faculty at my junior high was just discussing this today. “Thanks” to DIEBELS, we have several students who have high Lexile levels and can read any word, but have NO comprehension whatsoever.
My own son hates reading because of DIEBELS. It’s awful.
LikeLike
I am surprised that you and your middle school colleagues only see “several” students who can “read any word, but have not comprehension.” I have taught multiples elementary grades and currently teach fourth grade students. Sixteen years ago I studied four classes of reading students to compare reading programs. At that time, the other teachers and I observed only 3 students out of over 80 who could decode well and “read” fluently, but lacked basic comprehension. Today, I teach 43 readers and almost all of my struggling readers (below the 34th percentile according to MAP and end of year testing scores) decode quite well. After listening to 10 of my 12 low performing readers read an oral passage, you would not recognize a reading problem except for their struggle to read higher level vocabulary words. The Title I literacy support teachers administer Fountas and Pinnell assessments and often move my students up the alphabet scale because they are fluent readers. But I find my students often cannot explain basic characterization or plot sequence. Many of my students struggle to identify the topic. I wish I could pinpoint when the shift to better decoding and lack of comprehension took place.
LikeLike
I think the last several years teachers have been required to shove students through the motions of reading (decoding) so quickly that there is little time for students to truly comprehend what they’re reading. Now, they are shoving lexile levels into lower grades, not accounting for the students’ lack of experience, background or exposure. This creates a comprehension gap. But, tell that to the creatorscof Common Core or PARCC or anything that is going on.
I try to give personal examples from my own experiences from time to time. I liken this to having someone tell me about a recipe or dish that might be using ingredients from European or Asian menus. I may not have ever eaten those foods. I may have had Americanized versions of these. But, using the terms with which I am unfamiliar, there is no “connection” made in my mind. And, exposing me to it once or twice does NOT cause me to remember the names of dishes or techniques or recipes. I am not a slow learner, either!! We are doing a real disservice to children!!!
LikeLike
If the fluency metric is a count of words read, then there must be a triage on which words the student is expected to read. A long time ago I looked at a list of words that kids were expected to read…noticed zoo on the list but not art, yellow on the list but not violet, and so on. Seems to me the fluency or speed for reading hinges on meaning and experience.
LikeLike
These tests are devastating to a child with dyslexia. Speed is the enemy of comprehension, not an indicator of it.
LikeLike
Some fun info about DIBELS and Reading First
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2005/10/and-reading-first-corruption-award.html
And from Susan O, who was all over this back the.
http://www.susanohanian.org/show_research.php?id=129
LikeLike
I can’t stand the DIBELS. The lists of nonsense words overlook the importance of reading comprehension and discount children’s natural inclination to make sense of their experiences. Skills should be taught to young children within meaningful contexts. DIBELS is only about drilling discrete skills and turns kids off to reading even before they’ve begun.
“DIBELS: Pedagogy of the Absurd Hurts Children” http://fairtest.org/dibels-pedagogy-absurd-hurts-children
LikeLike
Click to access wilde.pdf
LikeLike
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)
LikeLike
https://dibels.uoregon.edu/market/assessment/dibels/
LikeLike
I’ve been a Reading Specialist (MA in Reading Education) for a long time. I’ve actually GIVEN the F & P Benchmark Assessment AND the DIBELS to a lot of young kids. It’s true that F & P have made $ but Heinemann Publishers has long been a favorite of mine because the products they have for teachers are written by people who have actually spent their careers teaching real kids. It is a mischaracterization to claim that F & P have changed their expectations to align with the CC. Read about their assessment here -(http://www.heinemann.com/fountasandpinnell/researchBAS.aspx). This assessment helps me (remember I actually teach struggling readers) figure out what kids know how to do when they read REAL books. 5 year olds read BOOKS, not passages of text on a piece of paper.
LikeLike
I am not convinced it’s a mischaracterization. In their own words, F&P said:
“Achievement in literacy is trending upward! Children are entering kindergarten with more literacy awareness; they are responding to literacy-rich kindergarten curricula; they are learning fast and acquiring more experience in reading and writing. Earlier and higher levels of reading are the result, and that is good news. Expectations are higher and teaching is shifting. Recommended entry-, mid-, and exit-level goals, as well as intervention goals, must change.”
This and MUCH more regarding the upgrading of level recommendations is in this document entitled The F&P Text Level Gradient™ Revision to Recommended Grade-Level Goals.
Click to access whitepapertextgrad.pdf
My kinders do not come to school with those advantages. Fountas and Pinnell can say “Remember that the recommended grade-level
goals are intended to provide reasonable guidelines for gradelevel
expectations, which should be adjusted based on school/
district requirements and professional teacher judgment. We do
not advocate using levels as a basis for grading student
achievement,” but DIBELS, mClass and other K-2 assessment “tools” focus only on the goals as GOALS and not as guidelines.
This is F&P’s way of abdicating responsibility. Oh, we didn’t MEAN for you to take these goal changes THAT seriously! We just wanted to sell you a bunch of intervention products for those who cannot achieve those goals.
LikeLike
Many of my first graders did not come to school with these skills either. I have one student who speaks no English whatsoever, 12 who are English language learners, and over half did not know the alphabet or how to write their own name on the first day of school, let alone read a book.
That’s my fault, of course, because I should not choose to teach in a Title I school with 98% free and reduced lunch and I should’ve been able to accelerate them with rigor and magic.
Then I could’ve caught them up the year and a half they were behind the ‘ideal’ level of performance set by F&P , Calkins, and all the other sell-outs who chose NOT to challenge the developmentally inappropriate CCSS changes but rather to hop on the bandwagon and profit from the decimation of beginning readers and their teachers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah the magic of CCSS: “pre Common Core a 1st grader was expected to read 40-64 words per minute. Under the Common Core, they are now expected to read 69+ words per minute.”
VOILA, it shall be done!!
LikeLike
Just like NCLB promised that all students would perform successfully at grade level. Well, we know how successful that has been. As for my 1st graders, they’ve all made progress this year and they are all happy to pick out a book and read it. In reality, what more can you ask for?
LikeLike
My NANA told me I would marry a prince charming and live in a place by the sea, like Anabel Lee.
LikeLike
I cross posted the original article : http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Fountas–Pinnell-Create-M-in-Best_Web_OpEds-CREATING_Change_Common-Core_Control-150313-239.html#comment537133 and wrote two comments with embedded links.
COMMENT 1:
The motivation is clear….create failure and you can FIX the schools. Krugman did a great piece on Inventing Failure.
And by the way, the FIRST element of an AUTHENTIC lesson plan, as every teacher knows, IS MOTIVATION. How do you motivate a 5 year old to read if the brain is not ready, and they have never seen text in their young lives? Built in failure at five years old!
I began planning and teaching in 1963, and the enormous success I enjoyed (see my author’s page here for a run-down) is due to my gift for knowing how to engage kids… and I can tell you it was not by offering high grades on tests, or a promise of a college education. (In that 7th grade, I gave no tests, beyond a few quizzes for spelling — all grades were based on performance (writing) and on meeting the CLEAR RUBRIC which the kids helped to create in September…. CLEAR EXPECTATIONS & REWARDS based on effort, and hard work.
I ask you, dear reader… are you hearing anything like this anywhere?
How could this third level research done in 12 districts and hundreds of schools across the nation just DISAPPEAR?
Riddle me THAT?
Answer: when the budgets needed to be reduced the first ones to be thrown out, were the experienced teachers…then the CCcrap could be foisted on the novice with no DUE PROCESS RIGHTS. It worked! I was the NYS English Council’s Educator of Excellence in 1998. Do you imagine I would replace my successful curricula with the CC crap?
Why did they have to disappear? Oh that is easy: so Gates and friends a the top, could re-write what we grunts on the line at the bottom with those children, would be mandated to do!
Then, when the kids failed, and the schools failed, they blamed the teacher, and took over. Go to myquicklinks series here, and see the privatization movement IN FULL SWING… in the legislatures across the nation see them deal the final blow!
Go to the Ravitch blogand put in the search field: Michigan, Nevada, Colorado, Ohio, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Louisiana, New York or “privatization,” and see what the Nightly News is NOT telling you about the end of our schools.
Or, go to the NPE News Briefs from The Network for Public Education and read the latest truth about what is ongoing at a rapid pace..THEN TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW!
Submitted on Friday, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:10:52 AM
LikeLike
crosspost
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Fountas–Pinnell-Create-M-in-Best_Web_OpEds-CREATING_Change_Common-Core_Control-150313-239.html#comment537133
This was comment 2… Remember there are embedded link at the Oped page! I put in a few here.
So, let me be clear… the Common Core crap, WAS initiated by Gates/ Broad/Walton/Pearson& clones for the purpose of creating markets and profits, has reduced education to a never-ending series of tests, and now is engaged in changing the rubric from age appropriate learning to expectations that hurt children… SO THEY CAN MAKE OODLES OF $$$
A complex subject like learning (like medicine or law) is interpreted for the common folks by those who people trust..experts in the field.
Not so in education, where business people have set their sites on making the schools their private money-making venture!
The real shame of the testing mania and the common core revisions is that it hurts children. They do not want to go to school in order to be tested and told how they are failing.
I am not an academic, but I was a mere (but wildly successful) teacher at the bottom — for four decades!
http://www.opednews.com/author/author40790.html
You see, in my last tenure, my students (the entire 7th grade at our middle school) were so successful that Harvard & Pew, chose to study my methods and curriculum (written wholly by ME in order to meet the simple reading/writing objectives for the age group) . I was the cohort in NYC as the research studied tens of thousands of classroom teacher- practitioners to determine what really works.
The genuine Pew research for STANDARDS- Based Reformdisappeared once Bush put the NCLB ‘standards’ (i.e..testing) into effect. It was based on the Eight Principles of Learning,, were reflective of the Principles of Learning developed by Lauren Resnick,.
www.newvisions.org/page/-/Prelaunch%20files/PDFs/NV%20Publications/challengestandards.pdf
MILLIONS WERE SPENT ON THIS RESEARCH… I KNOW because my practice was the cohort in NYC for 2 years. Principles of Learningfor Effort-based Education – Ramsey describes eightcharacteristics of successful learning environments.
http://ramsey.spps.org/uploads/polv3_3.pdfOh you never heard of this…my my! Hmmm, I wonder why?
The Second principle was REWARDS FOR ACHIEVEMENT. (the first was CLEAR EXPECTATIONS) and the third was GENUINE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT.
Take a look at Arkansas,
http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2015/03/07/bill-allows-outside-nonprofit-to-operate-school-district-taken-over-by-state
“Rep. Bruce Cozart, a Republican who chairs the House Education Committee, would expand the state’s sweeping powers to operate a school or school district in state receivership for academic reasons, including allowing the state to contract with an outside nonprofit to operate the district. The Commissioner of Education may: Directly operate or contract with one or more not-for- profit entities to operate academic distress schools or school districts assigned to the achievement school district, including providing direct services to students; The commissioner can assign whole districts or single schools to the state “achievement district” for purposes of such out-sourcing.
AND…
The law significantly advances existing takeover powers by allowing the commissioner to waive the teacher fair dismissal act. Due process in firing? Gone. The state can also waive the fair hearing law and any requirement to engage in collective bargaining. Employees become at-will — fireable for any, or no, reason”
Can the sixth amendment right be violated by a state law?
Are teachers fair game with no protection in America.
Submitted on Friday, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:20:02 AM
LikeLike
I entered a similar comment on another thread a few days ago but I will post it again.
Last year our “Child Study Team” (guidance counselor, psychologist, social worker, speech pathologist) required classroom teachers, without consulting us in any way, to use DIBELS ‘fluency’ passages to ‘progress monitor’ our Response To Intervention (RTI) students, as mandated by NBLB.
In January were were told that we must use the DIBELS ‘fluency’ passages every 10 days to measure reading growth. The passages were far too difficult for beginning readers who were struggling. I ran 3 different DIBELS passages through 7 readability formulas and the average readability score of the DIBELS passages was mid third grade, despite the fact that these passages were purportedly for first grade readers, mid-year.
When I confronted the CST with copies of the readability scales they backed down and ‘let’ us teachers choose fluency passages that were far more appropriate for measuring growth.
Why were non-teachers with no experience teaching reading placed in charge of selecting assessments to measure reading? Why was the DIBELS ‘fluency’ measure chosen at all? Simple and easy to interpret data and quick administration, and useful in making teachers squirm while being blamed for lack of ‘progress’ in these struggling readers. It was not chosen because it was accurate, appropriate, or useful for teachers and students. Nothing today is anymore.
Being coerced through threats of losing federal funding into using DIBELS under the corrupt and failed Reading First program did its dirty work though — DIBELS is like kudzu, deeply rooted and next to impossible to eradicate. That’s when the federal DOE began to break the law by interfering with curricular decisions and it has only accelerated since then.
LikeLike
Years ago I heard a prominent literacy expert say about craziness of assessing kids like this, “would you plant a row of carrots then pull them up every day to see if they’re growing?”
LikeLike
DIBELS was designed to help teachers (who apparently are absolutely unable to do so on their own) identify students at risk in reading. I can’t imagine doing the test every ten days because the test has to be administered one student at a time, and it takes about ten minutes a student. With 24 students to test, that is 240 minutes – 4 solid hours of teaching time – taken from instruction. While I test, the other 23 students have to do things that they can do independently, and stay quiet, and they are seven years old. I know of districts that dropped it because it was absolutely useless. I wish my district would do the same.
LikeLike
How is Rupert Murdoch linked to DIBELS?
LikeLike
From what I’ve been able to tell from reading reports online, as well as my district’s contracts with Amplify Education Inc., a Murdoch company formerly called, Wireless Generation, Amplify holds the rights to computerized progress monitoring of DIBELS, as well as DIBELS trainings provided by their consultants.
Compelled by the requirements of NCLB, school districts adopted DIBELS and signed contracts with Amplify. Principals in my district were told they can’t drop DIBELS because the data does not belong to the district, however, my district’s school board, which was appointed by Mayor 1%, has continued to sign contracts with Amplify each year.
I think this goes to show how profiteering neoliberal right-wing GOP officials under Bush laid the foundation for the kinds of heavy handed federal over-reach that the right of center profiteering neoliberal DINOs in the Department of Education under Obama demonstrate –and continue to get away with– today.
LikeLike
due to complicit, corrupt local officials. (Sorry, ending got cut off)
LikeLike
Check out Reading First mismanagement and conflict of interest from the Officer of Inspector General US Department of Education. You can also read and view the testimonies of the hearing.
Reading First Hearing: Dr. Edward Kame’enui testi…: http://youtu.be/cdFPed6upQY
Reading First Hearing: Chairman Miller Q&A: http://youtu.be/_wZtjyuoJXo
Reading First Hearing: Starr Lewis testimony: http://youtu.be/9i0-aWEV1R0
http://www.trelease-on-reading.com/reading-first-p7.html
LikeLike
DIBELS is a prime example of how assessments are INTENDED to drive curriculum and instruction by those who promote, require and attach high-stakes to them. As demonstrated in the NCLB Reading First DIBELS scandal, this drive is motivated by “reading wars” ideology and money.
“NCLB: Ideology and Corruption?” http://fairtest.org/nclb-ideology-and-corruption
The fact that the DIBELS is still hanging around even after the scandal came to light attests to the tenacity of corrupt government policies and those who stand to profit. In the best interests of emergent readers, DIBELS should have been dumped years ago.
LikeLike
My friend was supervising a student teacher yesterday in a second grade classroom; the list of mandated spelling words included: “turquoise” and “corduroy”…. the supervisor said I know you are required to do this but for the students you have with you in this lesson those words are not appropriate.
I have had course world in Spalding /Gilligham, in “Phonovisual” and other systems that teach phonetic analysis, phonograms and awareness to young children and these words would be above the expectations for most 2nd graders.
LikeLike
I love this one, and sent it to Pi Lian Tu. She WAS a teacher of new immigrant Chinese elementary school kids, who could not speak a world of English. Ove 15 years, using her own methods and material sas we all id, she accomplished miracle in a year. All her kids, accordion got the citywide ESL tests could read and write English, and accordion got the the teacher sin the next grade could speak it fluently.
But Tu, did not ike world walls, and saw that balanced literacy mandates d did not work. So she did her thing… and was charged with insubordination and incompetency.
At her hearing,the principal was the only one allowed to speak, and even charged her with theft of money collected for Weekly readers.
She never got a chance to speak. her NYSUT attorney never gave her a chance.
She was fired.
Does anyone out there see the writing on the wall?
LikeLike
In phonovisual for example, we learned that the phonogram (what the child has to write and spell) should be at a developmental level of the child. Young children find it hard to make the differentiation in the speech sounds (example: sh/ch is a most difficult one) and some chidden don’t gain this ability until 7; yet, the teachers are now required to teach the phonogram (written expression of a speech sound) and have the children write and spell. There is a developmental pattern in Orton/Gillingham and Spalding that was prepared based on what the child’ was capable of at certain developmental levels; taking the Dibels and moving it “down” two grade levels does not address this problem it makes things worse.
LikeLike
Frank Smith and Kenneth Goodman note that the “skills” children need to pass DIBELS and similar tests are the result of reading. The use of DIBELS and its cousins encourages test preparation in the form of skills training, which is a confusion of cause and effect.
In other words, practicing reading nonsense words quickly, in preparation for the DIBELS test, will not contribute very much to helping children learn to read.
————————————————–
if you look at what Chall recommended (for example, the Roswell Chall test of blending) you will see a different orientation to what is being enforced as DIBELS…. I might make some enemies by stating this but Recovery Reading is the same problem that
Smith and Goodman note — the confusion of cause and effect.
The tests are being used inappropriately in high stakes accountability even if you find value in the tests as tools in another framework — it depends upon the students you have working with you and how the information is used to improve programs.
LikeLike
The Fuchs are responsible for the DIBELS and the Reading First initiative in the early 2000’s. Please see the articles by David Glenn in The Chronicle of Education (2/26/07, 5/4/07). One article in particular lambasts the despicable activity of these people. It’s titled “Reading for Profit” and it’s in the 2/2/07 edition of The Chronicle, also by David Glenn. Also, please go to the International Literacy Association’s website at reading.org to find more information. Their statement about Reading First (of which DIBELS is a part) is:
Summary
The Board of Directors of the International Reading Association (IRA) deplores the ethics violation and intentional mismanagement that occurred in the administration of the Reading First program by the U.S. Department of Education as detailed in the Final Inspection Report issued by the Office of the Inspector General. It is essential that all laws and regulations be adhered to in the administration of this program in order to implement it successfully, to protect its integrity among educators, and to ensure its continued public support.
Despite the serious flaws in the administration of Reading First, we recognize and commend the many hardworking teachers and administrators in U.S. schools and state departments of education who have worked diligently to implement sound and successful Reading First programs. We recognize the recent evidence showing that, despite the administrative mismanagement detailed in the Inspector General’s report, Reading First has been valuable in supporting the academic growth of students and the professional development of teachers (Center on Education Policy; Reading First Implementation Evaluation: Interim Report).
To ensure that Reading First is as successful as possible in improving reading achievement throughout the nation, the IRA Board of Directors (1) encourages the Attorney General to investigate whether criminal law has been violated in the mismanagement of Reading First and to bring appropriate indictments of any individuals who have violated these laws; (2) requests the Secretary of Education to develop and make public rigorous administrative procedures and establish new partnerships with professional organizations to ensure that the intent of this legislation is fully realized; and (3) asks Congress to reauthorize Reading First with clearer guidance on the roles and responsibilities of the Department of Education and of the states and local education agencies.
Dr. Jay Samuels, past president of the International Literacy Association called DIBELS “barking at print.” No reading specialist I know is in favor of it, yet the federal government demanded that it be used in order to obtain funding. Two other centers for Reading First are at the University of Florida and the University of Texas. Bush country! Need I say more?
LikeLike
Sigh – in Colorado we are stuck with Reading First/DIBELS lovers in our Department of Education. We have Sopris in our state, Louisa Moats in our state, and a former RF “coach” on our State Board of Education.
LikeLike
Essentially DIBELS is a diagnostic tool or assessment for reading proficiency and fluency. If you want to see it in action go to youtube and search for DIBELS. The videos I watched are not obtrusive or demeaning of the children. The assessment is timed so that a diagnostic score can be derived. This will give teachers specific information on probable issues a student might have and chart their ongoing proficiency on reading. If a student is really having issues, further diagnostic assessments can be performed.
DIBELS can be an excellent tool, of many tools a teacher could use, if used and administered appropriately. What DIBELS and other assessments attempt to do is to quantify how well a student is performing. If teachers do not believe that assessments like DIBELS are beneficial, then teachers need to develop assessments that are beneficial. A teacher simply saying “In my professional opinion your daughter/son is reading at grade level” is not sufficient, you need to quantify your assessment.
More on DIBELS https://dibels.uoregon.edu/
This University program costs $1 per student per year. As their website says “We reinvest 100% of revenues back into research and customer support.”
Honest question: Is this too much money for a system like this?
LikeLike