What are the best O-G based programs?

Lindamood uses different techniques than O-G and a weak scope/sequence after the student identifies the letter sounds. This is a reason that I use both: Lindamood for developing the sound/symbol relationship and O-G for my phonics piece in developing the associative process of seeing print and relating it to spoken language.

There are, however, some invaluable teaching tools in Lindamood that I embed into my O-G. Example are the questioning techniques/error handling. Another is the affixes chart. Tracking is a third one—I do a little tracking—not as much as the purists because the literature just doesn’t support it—and neither does my clinical observation. I also use Elkonian boxes for students of all ages. I just vary the pictures to suit my audience.

In my opinion, someone trained in pure O-G can use any program (Wilson, Recipe for Reading, Spaulding, Hermann, etc., etc.) and do a great job. They can also use more trade books and basals and adapt them—or write their own decodable text.

Some folks have a preference for Wilson or SPIRE or whatever. (Personally, I cannot imagine using only one program to fit the needs of such a diverse population.) I think it is the teacher’s choice and that it doesn’t matter as long as the outcome is the same: measureable reading achievement.

Programs are easier to use than pure O-G. But, if one has the real-deal OG training, they can then think more clearly about what is working or not working for their group of students. I think teachers must be method-driven else we become program puppets and dance to someone else’s music (who has never met our students).

“Tracking is a third one—I do a little tracking—not as much as the purists because the literature just doesn’t support it—and neither does my clinical observation. “

What do you mean by your response above? What literature? Isn’t tracking the heart of the LiPS program?

I worked in a college clinic under a LmB certified instructor. (The clinic wasn’t owned by the Lindamoods, but the Ph.D. who ran the clinic was certified in ADD/LiPS by Pat Lindamood in the 1980’s and a stickler for pure LiPS practices.) I was one of about 15-18 tutors who worked with LD college students using this method. IMO, there was way too much tracking and not enough reading. The heart of any reading program should be related to words, sentences, and passages…and more quickly than many LiPS instructors get to it.

The National Reading Panel’s discussion on segmenting, blending, and phoneme manipulation found that these activities were more productive when done with phonetic symbols (letters) after a brief period of phonological tasks (tasks without letters). I don’t remember the exact number of hours but it was less than 20 total. (I’ve seen Lindamood clinician track for months on end because the student couldn’t do it. In the end, they still couldn’t do it. That just never made sense to me.)

Why then do I do any tracking you may ask? Because I feel that students need some pure auditory processing—and the lit supports that—since reading is an associative process back to language.

It really varies for me by student. Some I track more. Some less. There are so many variables—working memory, auditory processing, visual processing, attention/concentration, speech motor issues, just to name a few off the top of my head.

Barbara,

I hope that last message didn’t sound terse or know-it-all. I don’t mean it that way. All this is just my interpretation.

I’ve been sitting here balancing my checkbook and looking at emails intermittantly and I’ve gotten myself a bit bleary-eyed. (It was the checkbook and all those debit card transactions that we never write down. What a nightmare.) I multi-task and get tired and sound too direct. My apologies.

My enemies feel that I believe I know it all. My friends know that I firmly believe that I can never know half of it.

I’d pick & choose depending on the individual. Wilson’s really geared to older students so if I were doing early intervention I’d look at others. The really good training invovles a whole lot of diagnostic thinking so none of my students really had the same “program.” And once you know teh bigger picture, it’s really hard to isolate and know what it would be like to just have one program in your head.
If someone wanted to know what one program to be trained in… I’d still be playing diagnostician. For me, the “phonics” elements were easy and most of ‘em, I’d figured out already — so I was making corrections in our teaching book. I needed lots of work on how to convey that information to students for whom it *wasn’t* obvious — visual-kinesthetic learning was a foreign language to me that I had to learn.
And of course some teachers are better than others.

No, I don’t think it was a know it all response. I value this discussion board better than the other boards I have joined. I think that we’re all professionals here although of course what we write can be subjected to misinterpretation because it’s written, not spoken.

I also question the value of too much tracking with blocks. I do much of tracking with pictures, but once I think the students get them, I proceed to letters.

I feel that way, too. I have so many methods and programs running around that when students don’t get it, I just reach back there and pull something out. I have to really think about it to know where I gleaned the idea.

The diagnostic part is the pure OG training. Then, like you, I read lots of other stuff, and pick up ideas.

Using small magnetic letter tiles and metal cookie sheets, I do a small group (3-5 students) word-building activity that resembles Lindamood spelling. (It is different because I stay with the patterns we are studying in reading and don’t push to 4-5-6-7 sounds quickly *nor* do I use long vowel sounds until we get to silent e or easy open. I don’t use long vowel sounds in the middle of CVC, CCVC, or CCVCC etc patterns because that is an exception, not the generalization that I wish them to make.)
I however, I like the “if that is ___ (/blat/, for example), then show me ___” (/blast/ ,for example). Student says old word and new word and does the segment & blend (aka LiPS).

In our district, we call it “old word/new word” so as not to infringe on Lindamood copyrights. I own my own Lindamood materials so I can say it how ever I choose. Others in our district use a district-developed program for K-3 reading/spelling. It’s Lindamood method with different wording (poppers are lip exploder, for example). No tracking either, except with letters.) Students can get tracking in a clinical setting—each building has at least one Sped or SLP teacher with clincial LiPS expertise. I think there are some kids who need that—just not as many as the LiPS purists may believe.

Well, I’ve successfull “blown out” your email this weekend. Now I need to go score some IQ tests and write reports.

Goodness Susan. It sounds like you do everything in your job? Or are scoring the IQ tests part of your private practice? What are y’all using for IQ? We use the WISC which can only be given by a psychologist (thank goodness).

Just a side comment, PG does have the blending, segmenting, phoneme manipulation at the heart of the program. I am just trying to determine if I know all I need to know to teach reading (and of course, I don’t!!!).

Janis

Susan and Sue,

You have mentioned what I am getting at. Teachers need the foundational knowledge so that they can diagnose and then use the right strategies with an individual child. I am in a state, however, that has not yet required that special ed. teachers be trained in a MSSL approach to reading (maybe a better term than OG based, sorry). Therefore, any training I get is own my own and at my own expense. I have done PG and a kind person lent me LiPS and V/V tapes. But I’d need the training course probably to use LiPS effectively and with confidence.

So my point is, I can’t spend the time and money to go to all the possible trainings. Even if I did, my district gives us little funds to buy materials. So that is why I might only be able to justify one other thing besides PG (which I compeltly paid for myself). Plus, I’d like to encourage my district to consider training the teachers in SOMETHING, and I’m just wondering what the best one would be as it will take a small miracle to get them to do any. I am hearing that Wilson is not great for the younger kids, and I think we need to be getting the children earlier not later. They would not send anyone to the Lindamood Bell trainings that were held last summer only 45 minutes from here. What a missed opportunity! I’m afraid PG is too new for them to consider. They’d never take an idea form one lowly teacher like me, anyway. The last system wide program that they bought and gave training for was “Failure Free Reading”, so that should tell you what trouble we’re in.

Thanks for the input. I appreciate it and respect your opinions greatly!

Janis

I have the coursework/exp to give IQ’s and I don’t want to wait for the psychomitrist’s huge waiting list to pair down. I don’t have to do it—I like to do it. We use the WISC/WAIS III for IQ. I sometimes wish to put in something from the Stanford Binet (Matrices or Bead memory usually for the kids). I usually don’t supplement anything with the WAIS, unless I’m doing a short-form in a cross-battery assessment. I don’t get that jazzy most of the time. I also only have 13 official kids on my caseload. I have tons of at-risk that don’t qualify and I serve them without the related paperwork.

In private practice, I work from the school or psychologist IQ and achievement testing. I get a lot of referrals from psychologists and have no reason to believe that they have testing issues. They’re better at it than I, for sure. I do a reading coding test (syllable patterns) and a reading inventory. Sometimes I give the WRMT if not given.

Since I haven’t studied PG in depth, I cannot compare it to OG or Lindamood. I can say, though, that I use something of everything I’ve studied. I’m just about to order the teacher’s manual for that new Sopris West program, Rewards. I’m looking for a one-semester option for at-risk students who are not really LD—more corrective. I could make one up but I’m lazy. (Should say that I have other more pressing priorities.) :-)

Since I serve populations from 7-8 years all the way through adults…gifted IQ, average, below average, EMH, brain injured, high-functioning autistic, Language LD, NLD, at-risk correctives, and Asperger’s…I feel like I have to keep all the tricks at my disposal. You may not feel that way because you serve a more specific group.

I strongly feel that Lindamood is worth learning no matter what population you serve. (Wish you were in KC…one semester course for $200-300 plus materials about $100. Youzers!) It isn’t an exclusive tool and I don’t believe you must do it exactly like they say for anyone & everyone. (I didn’t tell them that in the training/practica though…I just learned how they do it) :-)

I also believe that OG is worth learning, especially if you work with teen and adult populations. If you only work with little kids, I think you can get by without it— using some other phonics program. (I am not convinced we’ll get ‘em all to 4th grade reading and beyond without some excellent structure syllables work and Orton is stellar with that. Also, working w/remedials in the older group requires more diagnostics than just step-by-step following a script to teach ‘em stuff they can already do.)

I don’t let any program “work” me on the end of a string. I am the puppeteer and the materials/concepts my marionettes. (Bad analogy, but you know what I mean.)

Happy Sunday!

I took my O-G training the first time as a parent. Paid for it myself. Same w/LiPS, except I was in teacher ed by then. (My school wouldn’t count it as a reading course, though. Totally not recognized as important by those dinosaurs. That still irritates me.)

I pay for my own reading materials mostly, except some consumables and text sets. I use them privately and I make $600-800 a month teaching reading privately. I could make more but I want the cost reasonable for families and I want some time for family/friends, too. Still, that sum pays for a lot of materials and training…with money left over for a nice holiday.

I like owning my own materials because I take them with me and don’t have to beg anyone to use them. They just appear in my class and are whisked away home when I’m finished. Now people come to me to know what I use because I have excellent success. My district has recently bought Wilson Language kits for all sped teachers Gr 6-12. Am I jealous? Nope. I’m proud because I modeled that program at the middle school level. Now I just worry about them keeping the pace up so it doesn’t take till doomsday to get through that curriculum…

I became a teacher to decrease the prison populations and to help children achieve their maximum potential (as opposed to FAPE which will settle for any paltry gain). I am driven to distraction to help provide a literate population. It is not a job to me, it is a vocation. I try to model what I want to see in all teachers. Guess it’s the parent in me.

‘nuff of all that. Back to the report. (I like these little breaks!)

“I strongly feel that Lindamood is worth learning no matter what population you serve. (Wish you were in KC…one semester course for $200-300 plus materials about $100. Youzers!)”

Youzers is right! LB training at their Charlotte clinic was effectively $200 per day: 3 days LiPs, 2 days V/V, 2 or 3 for Seeing Stars, 1 for On Cloud Nine Math = about $1600 for 8 days. Ugh! Then the kits are about $300 for LiPS, etc. (I did buy the V/V kit as I need it and it was only $100). I asked to go but was told that programs were not important…any teacher could use the same methods. Yeah, right. Like we all know the LB content just by osmosis or soemthing. Thirty years or so of research and we should just “know” how to do it.

In defense of my state, they have set up a pilot program using various methods (including training, I might add) such as Wilson, Language, etc. at 10 best practice sites. But until the state mandates training and use of these programs, I’m not looking for us to get them at the local level.

Janis

Well, maybe I can be the Susan Long in my town! You sound just like me. I have learned everything about reading on my own. I was also driven to understand it better when my own child was labeled APD. What I found out was more than I bargained for…I also learned why HI children weren’t reading above third grade level on average. It’s been a wonderful, exciting discovery, however lonely in that no one else is very interested.

I think I will eventually tutor reading privately and get out of the school system. I need to get better at it before I do. Would you mind emailing me and explain how you do your private tutoring business? Do you get paid in cash or do you do it as a business with all the related taxes, etc. That is the one thing I’m not sure about.

Thanks,
Janis

The college here (Longview Community College) offers the class for two weeks in June each year. If you really want to do it, I could probably find inexpensive lodging close to the site. You can take it with or without Master’s credit.

Let me know if you’re serious and I’ll give you Dr. Clark’s email address. She can tell you costs, etc. for out-of-state course. Could be about $300.

Hello,

I’ve been lurking for a while, but I wanted to jump into this very interesting discussion. First, let me re-introduce myself because I haven’t posted here in a few years. I work as an educational consultant in private practice, primarily conducting comprehensive educational evaluations, usually on referral of attorneys or advocates. I’ve been a classroom teacher, reading specialist, college faculty (reading/language arts, assessment, special education), and director of the reading department in a pediatric hospital in which the staff conducted outpatient educational evaluations as part of multidisciplinary teams. Right now I’m a project director for a research organization, conducting reading research. I have a doctorate in reading, language and learning disabilities. With broadband access, I think that posting will be easier now, and I’d like to participate in this forum again. So hello to the people I don’t know and hello again to the people I do!

Now to the topic at hand. There are so many programs available and many of them are very good, as Susan already said. If time and money are in short supply and I had to choose only one, I’d get trained in OG, definitely with the supervised practicum. OG provides such an excellent overview of the language structure and how to break it down for students with learning difficulties, and it really helps teachers focus on individualizing lessons for specific needs. If you don’t individualize and just begin at the beginning and go all the way to the end of most programs, it takes too long and most students don’t have that much time. Time is precious for poor readers who are already falling behind. But the phonemic awareness piece is also really essential for many poor readers and while the MSSL programs get at this, they don’t usually teach it explicitly enough for them, i.e., at the auditory level. LIPS is a terrific program, but you can dig up the articles on the Elkonin method and use it without any formal training. In fact, I’ve only used that approach, occasionally stopping to focus on the places and manners of articulation for those students who need the oral-motor component. Works great! You don’t even need the pictures because research has shown that they don’t contribute to the positive effect. Sorry for going on so long, and I hope this is helpful.

Nice to see you again, doc! I see you’ve added to your incredible list of experiences. Hope you’ll continue to drop in!

You don’t need to be me…you are already you. And that’s top notch. Everyone brings a little to the table and follows, in their own way, their personal legend. I lucked into the right training early. Right place, right time.

I’ll email you about the private tutoring later in the evening.

Yes, welcome Andrea! This is a wonderful place to share ideas. Honestly, research beginning with this message board and web-site is what helped me begin my research into reading and APD/hearing impairment/language disabilities. I, for one, will certainly value the input of those of you who have been specializing in this area for many years.

I can see the value of taking the pure OG training. Then, as Susan said earlier, you could take any of the OG based programs and probably use them fairly easily. Does OG have an evaualtion component that helps you know where to begin? I use Phono-Graphix now and it does have a pre-test to give which helps you know where to begin. I like that. As you said, it is a terrible waste of time to begin at the beginning if it is not necessary. I think PG will work with most of my kids, but I think the OG training would really help ME to understand the reading process and rules better. Then if I need those tools, I have them. I know some programs including Lindamood-Bell and PG hire tutors who do not even have education degrees and they train them to give the programs. I can’t operate that way. I have to be able to constantly diagnose and understand WHY a child is having a problem, not just teach from a script.

What do you suggest to do to supplement the phonemic awareness aspect that you feel is lacking in most MSSL programs? (Or did you mean that you use LiPS techniques for that?)

Janis

That would be a wonderful opportunity. My main problem would be leaving my 7 year old for two weeks. My husband works long hours and we have no family here. I could even fly free with my husband’s frequent flyer miles! It’s very tempting, but I’d probably not be able to work it out. I may just have to get training in Charlotte and pay more to be able to come home each day. But thanks so much for the info…maybe later!

Janis

You don’t have to leave her. Classes 1/2 day or so. Daycare could be arranged if college daycare isn’t open in summer. I could probably get her into summer school in my district, too, for free.

It could be done.

Hello Janis,

<>

OG itself doesn’t have that, but I use an informal assessment to figure it out. Most trainers will discuss how to determine what your student needs. The wonderful thing about OG is that there is no “package.” There are no premade lesson plans. Of course, this also means more work for the tutor, which is one of the reasons why some people choose to use Project Read or Wilson instead. But the beauty of it is that it enables you to pick and choose which elements need to be taught so you can fill in the gaps. Most students with reading difficulties don’t fall into a neat category—maybe they didn’t learn a vowel or two, and they need to be taught some r-controlled vowels, and they don’t know some of the vowel teams. So with OG you can fill in the gaps and continue to review those concepts as you move forward with more advanced work. It’s a cumulative approach but very systematic. It’s also simultaneously multisensory so that the various senses are being tapped at the same time rather than in sequence.

<>

It’s not so much that the PA is lacking because all MSSL programs teach students to segment words into their component sounds and to blend the sounds together into words. But a lot of kids need to be taught more explicitly at the auditory level without letters. You need to eventually connect it back to letters but not at first. LiPS is a good program. I just use the Elkonin method. It’s quick and easy. If you search the reading literature for Elkonin, you’ll find a couple of old articles from the 1960’s that have been translated. Elkonin was Russian. The method stands up today and is the basis for a lot of PA training in research and some commercial programs. I’m sure you’ve seen people do it—it’s just a matter of placing a marker like a chip into predrawn squares as you articulate the phoneme. So if the student is segmenting a two-segment word (e.g., at), you draw a diagram with two connected squares and you say, “at.” Then the student places a chip in the square on the left and (hopefully) says /a/. Then he places a chip in the square to the right of that and says, “/t/.” So he’s segmented the word “at.” The chips and diagram (squares) are only used to make the procedure explicit and concrete. You can stop using them later. For a three-segment word (e.g., fat), there would be three squares. But we’re segmenting phonemes not letters. So “that” only has three segments and so does “case.” Later, you move to four-segment words (e.g., last, grab) and still later you add in those hard to hear nasal sounds (m, n). By this time your student is getting pretty good at this and you’re ready to manipulate phonemes—add, delete, and substitute them, similar to the LiPS program. You can now use letter tiles instead of the chips and connect the process to real letters. I like to do my PA work at the beginning of the tutoring session and try to emphasize the phonemes I’m working on in the OG part of the lesson. So if I’m teaching the “th” letter-sound association, I’ll use a lot of “th” words first in the PA part. Or the vowels I’m working on. That way, the student gets used to hearing the sound and forming it orally. Hope this wasn’t too complicated!

Hey, it’s been *days* since I’ve written this link — http://www.auburn.edu/~murraba — the “letterbox lesson” link on the Reading Genie’s page is nuthn’ but Elkonin boxes without the Russky name.

Great, thanks Sue!

Your explanation was great. The program I am now using has children segment words, but they use letter squares. So I can see that maybe some children might need a step before that.

I’ve now thought of a new question, but I think I’ll post it at the top of the list so that it won’t be buried here!

Thanks,
Janis

Hi Sue,

How are you doing? Haven’t chatted with you in so long. Russky, indeed! I loved that link. Thank you for posting it. I haven’t seen it before. And the letterboxes ARE Elkonin boxes, as the author so nicely says himself. But I was suggesting that a lot of students who need work in phonemic awareness need to begin with just the letter sounds before adding letters to the mix. And I think this is so even for students who have been introduced to reading for several years and that are being taught reading. (For the nonreader, I would hold off on the reading part until PA had been established, but this doesn’t make sense for the older reader. It seems to work okay to do both at the same time.) So I’ve found that for these students it helps to work on PA without letters at first. The research shows us that PA programs that use letters work best, so it’s important to connect the PA to real letters at some point. I just think it helps to reduce the number of variables at first.

When we work with my son on PA- we just used caps from milk containers (just needed to buy various brands for a while to collect different colors.); no need to buy any special materials- just ask a few friends to help.

Re: does OG have a component that tells you where to begin intervention?

Absolutely yes! I learned OG quite a few years ago at the Gow School in New York State. A very important part of my training was the diagnostic pre and post-testing and error analysis. The spelling tests are just called Criterion I, II and III. I’m not sure who designed them, but they cover everything you need to know to start working with the student. And you can adapt them later on to test new information.

The reading test is called the IOTA. It’s a reading inventory of about 50 words that are specifically chosen to pick up reversals, omissions, phantom letters, perseveration etc. I was told that it stands for Independent Orton Teachers Assessment, and I firmly believed that, until several years later, the person who told me that said she had made it up and had no idea what IOTA stands for.

Some of those old tests are no longer under copyright. If not, maybe you could post on-line. If so, then perhaps you could post an address/phone for purchase.

Did you teach at Gow, Eleanor?

What is the O-G programs you are talking about? I teach remedial reading to the fifth grade students who are below their grade level in reading. I am interested in learning disabled techniques, and ADHD.

Nadine,

You have come to a great place to learn about reading methods! Here is a great article from this site that explains Orton-Gillingham techniques:

http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/reading/mssl_methods.html

Janis

Hi Nadine,

Orton-Gillingham is a multisensory, synthetic phonics instructional *method*. (Synthetic means whole-to-part and part-to-whole.) Pure OG is diagnostic: assessing to know what skills are missing and then teaching those skills and assessing to be sure they’re holding.

The OG based *programs* have a teacher start at step #1 or #2 and go to step #50 or beyond. A method-trained person doesn’t have to follow the script of a program, though may glean ideas/techniques from the various OG-based programs—and other methods/ strategies, too. Many use the programs for the convenience of word lists and controlled vocabulary practice sentences/passages.

OG is easiest in 1:1 setting but I do it in groups of 4-6, too. I try to limit my P/PP readers to groups of 3-4. I’ve seen whole schools do it full classroom with pull-out support. Can use controlled-vocabulary texts from various programs or trade books/basals.

If you get training, try to get someone who is a Fellow from OG Academy. They usually have a practicum with the instruction. That is so valuable. People don’t use it unless they have time to practice it.

Lindamood-Bell is another of the methods. I am trained in and use both OG and Lindamood-Bell techniques in my lessons.

From what state are you? Close to an urban area?

Here is the web address of the Academy of Orton-Gillingham:

http://www.ortonacademy.org/

After reading your message I looked on the net for some reference to the IOTA. I only found one. That is within the course content of a graduate program in education at SLU, where it is mentioned as part of the required materials for the graduate students to do practice testing.

What is the worst that could happen to me if I post it? Could I be sued? By whom? Not sure …… let me know your thoughts. Maybe I should just email it privately to those that want it.

No, I did not teach at Gow. I was an Orton trainee there quite a few years ago at their Summer Teacher Training Institute.

It was about 3 weeks long and included supervised practicum. The children we worked with came by bus each morning from Buffalo. They were given breakfast and then they were our practicum students. I think they also had some sort of outdoor program for them in the afternoon while we attended lectures. They still have the Summer Institute, although I think it’s a little different now because I hear the Gow has their own program called Reconstructive Language which they promote. I’m sure it’s a good one though.

My instructor was the very best you could ever wish for. She had a way of explaining things so that you literally _could not make a mistake_.

Before that I had used WRTR (self-taught). I found it to be a really good foundation to Orton and I was glad I knew it. But once you know Orton you can see it’s not even in the same category as far as effectiveness goes. I also did Lindamood Bell training at Foothills Academy in Calgary. I’ve gone to a lot of these program seminars including PACE quite recently. None of them are a match for Orton though. Just my opinion….

I’m generally working with folks at HS or college level with enough reading so that it makes sense to tie what they know with where they’re going — but at least one of my folks couldn’t rhyme.
When I worked on the K-12 reading curriculum, it started with a fair amount of print-free sound manipulation — and then incorporated the sounds into learning every letter. I was very impressed.

Look over the paper copy and see if you have a cover page. That or the next page should show a copyright. Still, to be safe: email privately.

If you do email, count me in please. :-)

You seem to have an excellent background. Do you teach? Tutor? Both? What area of the country?

OG Definition should have read: Analytic/Synthetic (whole-to-part and part-to-whole).

Dr. K. is back to keep me on my toes!

Just to let you know I haven’t forgotten that those that are interested in the IOTA. I’m in the process of getting it onto my hard drive in a format that I can email out. It’s not that long and should have it finished B4 the weekend. Then I will send it privately to those who have requested it.

I’m not sure if anyone wants the Criterion tests too. Let me know.

BTW Susan, I’m the one that you helped with the interpretation of the WISC scores - for the nld student - on the other Bulletin Board. I’m in Toronto, Canada. As I said before, I’ve never seen one message from you that I didn’t completely agree with.

It’s great to have feedback from people who know what they’re talking about. So thanks all of you for that.

Eleanor,

Want to email my associate superintendent and tell her how brilliant I am? My district is thinking of spending beaucoupe bucks bringing in Wilson training for 2-days over pure O-G for one week for middle/high school sped teachers. I’ve not given up yet, but the teachers all think they must be trained in Wilson to use Wilson—even if they’re O-G certified. They look at me like, “sure *you* can do it…not sure about me. (They don’t seem to understand that I’m a very average person with a large passion.)

Part of the problem for teachers is that they’re following these program scripts without any substance behind them. One teacher I know spent a whole year in Book 1 of Wilson (CVC, no initial or final blends). How could any teacher be thinking about what they do and spend 10 months on forty pages of material with 14-year-old, average IQ people? Then we wonder why kids go three years without growth using one or another program. ‘Tain’t the program teachin’, but the teacher who must instruct. We must never forget that people, not programs, make decisions.

Looking forward to those tests! Do you teach in Toronto? What a wonderful city…cosmopolitan & trendy.

Susan