DOCUMENT RESUME CS 014 307 ED 453 511 Moriarty, David AUTHOR A Message to Congress: Redefining Special Education. TITLE Reading Recovery Council of North America, Columbus, OH. INSTITUTION 1997-00-00 PUB DATE NOTE 4p. Reading Recovery Council of North America, Inc., 1929 Kenny AVAILABLE FROM Road, Suite 100, Columbus, OH 43210-1069. Tel: 614-292-7111. Web site: http://www.readingrecovery.org. Journal Articles (080) PUB TYPE Network News; p16-17 Spr 1997 JOURNAL CIT MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE *Early Intervention; Elementary Secondary Education; Futures DESCRIPTORS (of Society); Instructional Effectiveness; *Learning Disabilities; Position Papers; *Reading Instruction; *Special Education; *Student Needs *Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; *Reading IDENTIFIERS Recovery Projects ABSTRACT This article sees Reading Recovery as a tool for systemic change that has the potential to reduce the number of children classified with learning disabilities. The article contends that as the United States Congress meets to revisit the "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act" (IDEA), it is imperative that they develop an awareness of critical educational research regarding successful early intervention practices, particularly Reading Recovery. It points out that in the author/educator's district, over a 5-year period, 175 first graders have successfully passed through Reading Recovery, but only 5 of these students have been referred to special education. The article argues that the goal of IDEA should be to stop the relentless referral of young children to special education because of reading failure when as many as 90% can be saved by strategic early intervention in the first grade through Reading Recovery. It notes that two reports have been released recently, one from the National Center for Learning Disabilities and another from the International Reading Association, which underscore the need for Congress to reconsider the way special education is implemented and children's needs are met. The paper calls for legislative support for research-based intervention, citing a speech by Kenneth Wilson, a Nobel Prize winner in physics, in which he described the effective school programs of the future--programs would include continuing professional development, reflective practice, quality control over the long run, successful scaling up, good marketing, and an acceptance of cost as a secondary issue to outcomes and achievement. (NKA) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. A Message to Congress: Redefining Special Education. by David Moriarty BUT CO I E AVA A 1r, PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement BEEN GRANTED BY EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 31ELusstil____ This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 2 INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Points of view or opinions stated in this 1 document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. Spring 1997 NETIAIORICNEWS COMMENTARY A Message to Congress: Redefining Special Education of the Summit on Learning Disabilities in Washington, D.C, in DAVID MORIARTY RRCNA BOARD MEMBER 1994: Learning DisabilitiesA National Responsibility. This DIRECTOR OF LANGUAGE ARTS K-12 report highlights the overwhelming evidence that too many MEDFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS learning disabled children are failing under the current imple- MEDFORD MA 02155 mentation of IDEA in public education. Instead, "...effort must be made to provide assistance as early as possible" (p. 7). Yet nine out of 10 first graders are succeeding with Reading As the United States Congress meets to revisit the Recovery and are thus diverted from special education. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), it is Summit report consistently emphasizes the need for effective imperative that Congress develop an awareness of crit- early intervention. ical educational research regarding successful early interven- In addition, the International Reading Association (IRA) tion practices in the United States over the past 10 years. released a similar report in 1995: Learning Disabilities A These successes are due in part to one of the most powerful Barrier to Literacy Instruction. This IRA report more specifical- early intervention, pre-referral, professional development mod- ly isolates the common practice of slotting into special educa- els availableReading Recovery. One of the most important tion children who have difficulty learning how to read. The effects of this intervention has been the dramatic decrease in IRA report identifies Reading the number of students referred to Recovery as an excellent special education after having been Reading Recovery is a tool for sys- successfully "recovered" through this example of both a profession- short, one-time intervention for first al development model and a temic change that has the potential highly effective intervention graders having difficulty learning to reduce the number of children model: "... a program how to read. In my own district, classified with learning disabilities. over a five year period, we have had designed to help students who are at risk of failure in 175 first graders successfully pass reading and who otherwise through Reading Recovery; however, would have been identified as learning disabled" (p. 10). only 5 of these students, less than 3%, have been referred to Reading Recovery not only teaches children how to read, but special education. also reduces the number of children labeled with learning dis- Reading Recovery is a tool for systemic change that has the abilities. With Reading Recovery, the lowest achieving first potential to reduce the number of children classified with graders not only catch up to the average readers in their class, learning disabilities. Research has replicated its ability to sus- but they also continue to learn and progress tain success over time over time, through over years which neither special education nor Title I programs can match. Many the 2nd grade, 3rd grade, etc., thus demonstrating its hallmark of "sustained success." Massachusetts communities have a success rate over 90%, a rate matched by several states. Reading Recovery is a program If, as the IRA report says, research demonstrates that that provides a way for a system to intervene for the Reading Recovery can decrease the number of first grade purpose of stu- preventing reading failure. It is accountable; it is research dri- dents classified as learning disabled, and if the placement of ven. It is an intervention program that results in fewer chil- children in Reading Recovery "for 15-20 weeks of one-on-one dren needing special education services or being retained in instruction is far less expensive than placing them in special the first grade, allowing them essentially to be indistinguish- education for one year" (p. 10), then what are we waiting for? able from other non-handicapped classmates years after inter- The IRA report emphasizes that the failure is not of special vention. It is a program that returns "recovered" first graders education, but of policy. IDEA "encourages the labeling of to at least the average reading level of the first grade class. children as 'broken' when it may be the method, the program, The goal of IDEA should be to stop the relentless referral of or the delivery model that is 'broken"' (p.11). Labels of learn- young children to special education because of reading failure ing disability are counter-productive, yet the labeling the when as many as 90% can be saved by strategic early interven- stigmatizing continues. Reading Recovery, however, does tion in the first grade through Reading Recovery. not view the child as "broken" or "malfunctioning," but only as a child who needs help early, strategically, intensely (one-on- one), and with an accelerated (not a remedial) model. National Reports on Learning Disabilities If children are victimized by the failure of policy, then Two reports have been released in the past year which change the policy! The IRA report suggests a change of defin- underscore the need for Congress to reconsider the way special ition from "learning disabled" and that schools provide high education is implemented and children's needs are met. First, quality, intensive early intervention. The report also states the National Center for Learning Disabilities issued its report continued on next page 3 Spring 1997 A Message to Congress: Redefining Special Education recent speech at Harvard University to an audience of acade- continued from previous page mics in higher education, referred to his book Redesigning that, after only one year with Reading Recovery, at least 75% Education (1994), where he describes the effective school pro- of at-risk children will be working at the same level as their grams of the future. He urged that programs must include con- classmates, suggesting only the remaining students are truly tinuing professional development, reflective practice, quality disabled and need the training and support of special educa- control over the long run, successful scaling up, good market- tion. ing, and an acceptance of cost as a secondary issue to out- comes and achievement. He said that Reading Recovery is Legislative Support for Researched-Based one of only two educational programs to fit this description, Intervention and that the development of all educational programs should In fiscal year 1997, the Massachusetts legislature allocated be based on the successful Reading Recovery paradigm. $500,000 for early intervention legislation that included lan- Astounding! And all that Reading Recovery requires is sup- guage specific to Reading Recovery so that other, non port to reach the needs of the masses. research-driven interventions could not qualify. After con- Without a viable alternative to special education through ducting their own seven-month independent investigation of early intervention such as Reading Recovery, one must keep research relating to Reading Recovery, the legislative team in mind that: confirmed: children who fail, fail early and fail often; the high degree of success of the Reading Recovery inter- once a child is identified as a reading failure, the cost to vention in teaching children how to read and write the school district continues in remediation, special its ability to defer children from special education help, special classrooms, and special materials; the ability of Reading Recovery to reduce the number of reading failure is costly; the child who cannot read suffers retentions from low self-esteem and has academic difficulties; its cost effectiveness (e.g., for every $3 invested in Reading retention and remediation, coming on top of failure, do Recovery, a school system saves $5) not help a child catch up with his or her peers nor func- Research conducted in Ohio over a five-year period tion successfully in school; through 1993 showed that less than 1% of Reading Recovery the consequences of reading failure do not end with the students were referred to special education (Lyons, 1994). cost to the school or to the school district; society bears The U.S. Department of Education reports in an urban study the cost as well because illiteracy often results in unem- that, out of 700 first grade students, Reading Recovery ployment and a life of poverty. reduced special education referrals from 1.8% to 0.64%, Since research has shown that special education interven- resulting in an annual cost savings of $100,000 for that school tion can neither "catch up" a student nor sustain success over district. time, the Reading Recovery alternative must be pursued. Such research suggests that Reading Recovery does have Write your legislators! the potential to reduce the escalating number of students diagnosed as having a learning disability. So why place chil- References dren in learning disability programs with no or limited suc- Kozol, J. (1995). Amazing grace. New York: Crown cess? Why maintain inequality when Reading Recovery has Publishing. the potential to equalize the chance for success for almost all children? To continue this inequality verges on neglect or Learning disabilities: A barrier to literacy instruction. (1995). Washington, D.C.: International Readng abuse of children. As Jonathan Kozol (1995) says, "The ques- tion is whether we want to be one society or two. Until that Association. is dealt with, nothing else will be solved." Learning disabilities: A national responsibility (1994). Report Reading Recovery is a viable alternative to special educa- of the Summit on Learning Disabilities. tion. Backed by over 30 years of research, it is an obvious pre- Washington, D.C.: Center for Learning Disabilities. referral program for first graders with reading or learning diffi- Lyons, C.A. (1994). Reading Recovery and learning dis- culties, especially since research suggests that once children ability: Issues, challenges, and implications. Literacy, are placed in special education programs that have limited Teaching, and Learning: An International Journal of success, the children rarely outgrow their disability exactly Early Literacy, 1, 109-119. the opposite of Reading Recovery placement. Wilson, K. and Daviss, B. (1994). Redesigning education. New York: Henry Holt & Co. Conclusion: Reading Recovery Must Be Considered Kenneth Wilson, a Nobel Prize winner in physics, in a U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) National Library of Education (NLE) Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) REPRODUCTION RELEASE CS 014 307 (Specific Document) I. DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION: Zioittak rlf4A,V4., Title: eibrAiN,ROXY t eCUA"Ciadt"711 "irUAAAJ Author(s): 14,(166, t-011511CUL,±4. Corporate Source: Publication Date: qiUrbill Gin(UjUiCA, AptiAlk lag LiaaCtinfeRIC 031)ALL4 II. REPRODUCTION RELEASE: In order to disseminate as widely as possible timely and significant materials of interest to the educational community, documents announced in the monthly abstract journal of the ERIC system, Resources in Education (RIE), are usually made available to users in microfiche, reproduced paper copy, and electronic media, and sold through the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). Credit is given to the source of each document, and, if reproduction release is granted, one of the following notices is affixed to the document. If permission is granted to reproduce and disseminate the identified document, please CHECK ONE of the following three options and sign at the bottom of the page. The sample sticker shown below will be The sample sticker shown below will be The sample sticker shown below will be affixed to all Level 1 documents affixed to all Level 2A documents affixed to all Level 2B documents PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL IN PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS MICROFICHE. AND IN ELECTRONIC MEDIA DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL IN BEEN GRANTED BY FOR ERIC COLLECTION SUBSCRIBERS ONLY, MICROFICHE ONLY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 2A 2B Level Level 2A Level 2B Check here for Level 1 release, permitting reproduction Check here for Level 2A release, permitting reproduction Check here for Level 2B release, permitting and dissemination in microfiche or other ERIC archival and dissemination in microfiche and in electronic media reproduction and dissemination in microfiche only media (e.g., electronic) and paper copy. for ERIC archival collection subscribers only Documents will be processed as indicated provided reproduction quality permits. If permission to reproduce is granted, but no box is checked, documents will be processed at Level 1. I hereby grant to the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) nonexclusive permission to reproduce and disseminate this document as indicated above. Reproductiob from the ERIC microfiche or electronic media by persons other than ERIC employees and its system contractors requires permission from the copyright holder. Exception is made for non-profit reproduction by libraries and other service agencies to satisfy information needs of educators in response to discrete inquiries. Sign Sig Printed Name/Position/Title: Ja/ilt a here, - Jean F. gLISScli /F4CC. T)trrfjOr nnrAddrkkoveirl, Orga please 1795- 292 -019a_-44O4 Axial K nr+1 Rd Stk +C. 100 E-Mail Addres*: umbus 614 4-132145-104,421 or !AU SSeiNg6t150ed Data: L1/5-1 III. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY INFORMATION (FROM NON-ERIC SOURCE): If permission to reproduce is not granted to ERIC, or, if you wish ERIC to cite the availability of the document from another source, please provide the following information regarding the availability of the document. (ERIC will not announce a document unless it is publicly available, and a dependable source can be specified. Contributors should also be aware that ERIC selection criteria are significantly more stringent for documents that cannot be made available through EDRS.) Publisher/Distributor: Address: Price: IV. REFERRAL OF ERIC TO COPYRIGHT/REPRODUCTION RIGHTS HOLDER: If the right to grant this reproduction release is held by someone other than the addressee, please provide the appropriate name and address: Name: Address: V. WHERE TO SEND THIS FORM: Send this form to the following ERIC Clearinghouse: However, if solicited by the ERIC Facility, or if making an unsolicited contribution to ERIC, return this form (and the document being contributed) to: ERIC Processing and Reference Facility 1100 West Street, 2nd Floor Laurel, Maryland 20707-3598 Telephone: 301-497-4080 Toll Free: 800-799-3742 FAX: 301-953-0263 e-mail: [email protected] WWW: http://ericfac.piccard.csc.com EFF-088 (Rev. 9/97) PREVIOUS VFRSIONS np THIS PCIPAA APP r1RC(11 PTP