Introducing a new series: Reacting to Fountas and Pinnell

您好，欢迎来到Triple R Teacht的第56集，这是Anna Geiger，来自测得的妈妈。在这一集中，我想介绍一个令人兴奋的新系列，我们将在下周开始。这将是一个十部分系列，我们研究了两个扫盲教育中的两个著名人物Irene Fountas和Gay Su Pinnell的评论。

If you're at all familiar with the guided reading levels A, B, C, D, E, etc., then you're connected in some way to Fountas and Pinnell because they were the creators of that leveling system. Many, many schools in the United States in particular use the Fountas and Pinnell reading program.

For many years, I was a huge fan of Fountas and Pinnell! I bought every book they had. I loved their books because they got me excited about teaching reading and showed me ways to get students excited about reading as well! However, after I learned about the science of reading and structured literacy, I realized that their core belief, which has to do with how students read words, especially beginning readers, was in conflict with what I had learned about how the brain learns to read and how we store words for future instant retrieval. Since that time, I've really realized that much of what I've learned from Fountas and Pinnell I can't trust because it starts with the wrong foundation.

现在，真的很快，我们可以谈论Fountas和Pinnell是谁。Irene Fountas是马萨诸塞州莱斯利大学的教授，同性恋Su Pinnell是俄亥俄州立大学的Emerita教授。人们向Fountas和Pinnell提出的主要关注点是他们对三提示的拥抱，这就是学生使用不同的线索来帮助他们在阅读时解决单词，尤其是开始读者。因此，这些学生正在学习使用不一定听起来不一定的单词的平整书籍阅读，但是他们可以使用上下文或单词的字母来弄清楚它们必须是什么。这是平衡扫盲的核心部分，这是我二十年来的核心。

I don't think everything about balanced literacy is bad, but three-cueing is definitely a rotten apple. The problem is that even though people have brought all these things to Fountas and Pinnell, they've kind of just dug in their heels. They haven't really engaged in much conversation and they certainly have not denounced three-cueing.

They've recently put out a series of blog posts with audio called "Just to Clarify." In that series, they answer ten questions that have been posed to them in the midst of, as some people would call it, the current "Reading Wars," we could also call it the discussion about the science of reading.

因此，这是他们在系列中回答的问题：第一个问题是两部分：您为什么选择不参加有关如何教书的最新辩论？您对在这场辩论加剧时感到陷入交火的老师有什么建议？

第二：您能澄清什么是MSV（三提示），以及为什么您认为这很重要？

第三：有些人建议您支持猜测的使用，您能对此发表评论吗？

第四名：指导阅读和使用级别的文本的使用如何推进儿童的扫盲学习？在综合扫盲系统中，指导阅读的角色是什么角色？

Number five: In your view of early literacy development, what is the role of decodable texts?

第六名：您能谈谈语音和教孩子阅读的角色，并澄清您的语音教学方法吗？

第七名：有些人将您的作品称为“平衡识字”或“全语言”。这些标签准确吗？

Number eight: What do you mean by "responsive teaching" and why is it important?

Number nine: Elevating teacher expertise has always been a hallmark of your work. What has led you to advocate so strongly that teachers are the single most important factor in a child's learning achievement?

最后，第十：关于教师在教孩子们如何阅读的作用的说法很多，但是学校管理人员，教练和其他教师领导人扮演什么角色？

Now, much has been written already in response to these blog posts. One person who has responded is Emily Hanford. You might remember that she was the author of "At a Loss for Words," which first kind of forced me to address the science of reading and structured literacy and start to figure out what the real story was there. Also Mark Seidenberg, who's the author of "Language at the Speed of Sight," in which he talks about how three-cueing is not what works to help children to read (plus a whole lot of other things). Both of them have been very disappointed by the blog series.

In fact, Mark Seidenberg said this, "Fountas and Pinnell clarified for me they haven't changed at all. They illustrate they still don't get it, that they're still part of the problem. These folks just haven't really benefited much from the ongoing discussion about what are the best ways to teach kids to read so that the most kids succeed."

I was reading somewhere else where someone wrote about this and they said it felt like Fountas and Pinnell's legs were stuck in concrete, they just wouldn't move.

Well, is that true? Is that really what they're saying in their series, that they don't care about the science of reading or structured literacy, and they are just going to hold fast to what they think works? We're going to examine that in the next ten episodes. In each episode, I'm going to share a little bit from their answer to each question and then give my response based on what I've learned from the science of reading, that is the research about how we learn to read.

您可以在本集的节目说明中找到他们博客文章的链接，以及艾米丽·汉福德（Emily Hanford）和马克·塞登伯格（Mark Seidenberg）的回复，您可以在themeasuredmom.com/episode56上找到。感谢您的收听，我们下周见。