The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction on Teachers ... · PDF fileThe Impact of Scripted...

Rocío Dresser 71

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instructionon Teachers and Students

Rocío DresserSan José State University

Issues in Teacher Education, Spring 2012

Scriptedreadingprogramshavehadanegativeimpactonteachersandstudentsaroundthecountry.Manyschooldistrictshaveadoptedtheseprogramsasawaytocomplywithstateandfederalmandates(Griffith,2008;Milosovic,2007).Thismovefromteacherledtoscriptedinstructionhasleftteachersfeelingpowerlessandoverwhelmed.Theyareoftencaughtbetweenwhattheyareaskedtodoandwhattheyknowisrightfortheirstudents(MacGillivray,Ardell,Curwen,&Palma,2004).It isevenmoreproblematicforteacherswhentheyseethatEnglishlearnersandotherstudentswithspecialneedsarenotmeetingtheiracademicgoals. Thequestioneducatorsaskiswhatmakesastudentaproficientreader? Last fall a young woman approached me and asked me if Irememberedher.Minervawasoneofmyfifth-gradeEnglishlearningstudentsandwasnowaseniorincollege.Shefondlyremembersourfifth-gradeclass,includingtheplays,songs,andbookclubs.ShewastheleadactorforoneofourplaysthatdealtwiththeAmericanRevolution.Thatyearthestudentsreadmanyselectionsrelatedtothishistoricalperiodandlaterwroteascriptfortheplay.Inmiddleschool,Minervajoined the school theater and participated in several performances.EventhoughshewasnotproficientinEnglishduringthefifthgradeandshecamefromafamilythathadlimitedresources,shewasableto

Rocío Dresser is an associate professor in the College of Education at San José State University. Her email address is rociodresser@aol.com

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction72

Issues in Teacher Education

achievehereducationalgoals,includingbecomingaproficientreader.LikeMinerva,childrenaroundthecountrycanbecomeavidreadersiftheylearntoenjoyreading. Today,effectiveandcreativeteacherdesigned instruction isbeingreplacedbyscriptedreadingprograms.Theseprogramsarechangingtheroleoftheteacherintheclassroomfromprofessionalstomeretransmittersofknowledge.Theideathattheroleoftheteacherhadchangedbecameevidentwhileconductingastudywithelementaryschoolteachersfromalocalschool.ThefiveparticipatingteacherswereconcernedabouttheirEnglishlearners(ELs)notmeetingtheiracademicrequirements.Theyattributedtheirstudents’low-testscorestothefactthatalargenumberofthemwereproficientdecoders,butstruggledwithreadingcomprehensionandcontentknowledge.Theyfeltthatthescriptedliteracyprogramwasrushedanddidnotgivethemenoughtimetotakeacloserlookatstudents’individualreadingneeds.Thisarticlebeginswithabriefoverviewoftheinitialstudyandpresentssomeoftheunexpectedfindings.Thearticlealsoexploressomeoftheunintendedconsequencesofscriptedreadingprogramsaswellastheclaimsmadebysomeproponents.Attheend,itprovidessomealternativestoscriptedinstruction.

The Study

ThiswasanActionResearchstudy.Inactionresearch,thegoalisforteachersandtheresearchertoworktogethertoidentifytheproblem,formulatetheresearchquestion,collectandanalyzethedata,andinter-pretthefindings(Savin-Baden&Wimpenny,2007).Theparticipatingteachersdidnotthinkthescriptedreadingprogramtheywereusingwaseffectiveinthatalargenumberofstudentshaddifficultycomprehend-ingtextandrememberingcomplexconcepts.Inanattempttoaddresstheseneeds,thisstudyexaminedtheimpactofblendingtwowell-knownteachingmethods,ReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReading.Thegoalwasfortheparticipatingteacherstolearnhowtoimbedthesetwomethodsintothescriptedreadingprogramandacrossthecurriculum.Scriptedreadingprogramsarecommerciallydesignedand“scientifically-based”literacyprograms inwhich language instruction ishighlycontrolled(Milosovic,2007,p.28).ReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReadingwereselectedbecauseithasbeennotedthatinstructionalmethodsthatdealwiththeintegrationoftwotypesofknowledge:(a)declarativeknowledge(knowledgeofconceptsandprinciples)(Chi&Ceci,1987;Heibert,1986),and(b)linguisticcontentknowledge(academiclanguage)(Cummins,2000)aremosteffective(Dresser,2000). Reciprocal Teaching helps students develop knowledge modules

Rocío Dresser 73

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

inlong-termmemorythatcanbeaccessedbythelearnerwhenneeded(Brown&Palincsar,1985;Lubliner,2001).Studentslearncognitivestrat-egiessuchaspredicting,questioning,clarifyingandsummarizing.Theyworkingroupsoffourwheretheydiscussthereadingselection.Eachstudentisresponsibleforoneofthestrategies.Learnerswhomasterthesestrategiestendtohavebetterreadingcomprehensionskills(Brown&Palincsar,1985;Takala,2006).ThegoalofNarrowReadingistoincreasevocabularyandcontentknowledgebyreadingselectionsfromonegenre,author,ortheme(Cho,Ahn,&Krashen,2005;Schmitt&Carter,2000).This recycling provides the reader with familiar context, backgroundknowledgeandvocabulary,whichincreasesreadingcomprehensionandlearning(Cho,Ahn,&Krashen)asdepictedinFigure1. Anintegratedthematiclanguageartsandscienceunitwasdesignedandimplementedinallfourthgradeclassesinaninnercityelementaryschoolforsixweeks.Thesciencecomponentforthisunitconsistedofrocksandminerals,whichisalignedwiththeCaliforniasciencecontentstandardsforpublicschoolsforfourthgrade(http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/sciencestnd.pdf).Threepreandpost-tests(QualitativeReadingInventory[QRI],anessay,andacontentareateacher-designedtest)wereadministeredtoallstudents.TheQRIincludesacollectionofexpositoryandnarrativereadingmaterials.Itassessesstudents’priorknowledge,readingfluency,vocabulary,readingcomprehension,retellingandtheirabilitytorespondtoimplicitandexplicitquestions(Leslie&SchudtCaldwell,2005). Asteacherspredicted,thepre-testsshowedthat18%ofthestudentsweredecodingbelowgradelevelandhadlimitedcomprehension.Seventy-onepercentofthestudentsweredecodingatgradelevel;incontrast,theywereatafrustrationorinstructionallevelinreadingcomprehen-sion.Elevenpercentofstudentsreadatanindependentlevelandwereataninstructionalorindependentlevelinreadingcomprehension. Atthebeginningofthestudy,teachersandstudentsparticipatedinReciprocalTeachingreadingactivities.Oncestudentsunderstoodtheirroles and learned how to use the reading comprehension strategies,theyreadinsmallgroups.Alargecollectionofbooks,videosandalist

Figure 1Comprehension and Learning

ComprehensionandLearning

FamiliarContext BackgroundKnowledge Vocabulary

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction74

Issues in Teacher Education

ofwebsitesthatdealtwithrocksweremadeavailableforstudentsandteachers.Thestudentsreadseveralselectionsonrocksandminerals,participatedinexperiments,drewtherockcycle,classifiedrocks,devel-opedvocabularylists,andwrotepredictions,questionsandsummaries.TheyalsoviewedvideosandusedtheInternettoaccesswebsites.Attheendofthestudy,thedatawerecollected,codedandanalyzed.Theresults showed that12%of thestudentsweredecodingbelowgradelevelandhadlimitedcomprehension.Therewasasmallimprovementamongthisgroupofstudents.ThefactthattheywerelimitedEnglishspeakersmayexplainwhytheyhaddifficultyreadingandwriting.TheintermediateEnglishlearnersmadethelargestgains.Seventypercentofthestudentsreadatgradelevel.Only5%wereatafrustrationlevelinreadingcomprehensionwhereastherestofthestudentsachievedaninstructionallevel.Thestudentsreadingatanindependentlevelrosefrom11%to18%.Amajorityofthesestudentsachievedanindependentlevelofreadingcomprehension. Thefirstassessmentsshowedthatstudentshadlittleornoknowledgeofrocks.Theyrespondedtothecontentknowledgequestions(Whatisamineral?)withoneortwowordresponses(“big,alot”)ortheywrote,“Idonotknow.”Attheendofthestudy,studentsrespondedincompletesentencesandusedthevocabularyrelatedtorocksandminerals.Danielwrote,“Someofthethings[materials]youmightfindinrocksarelava,soil, and minerals.”They wrote summaries that demonstrated theirunderstandingofrocksandminerals.Mayrawrote:

IhavejustreadthearticleMagma.Itsaysthatwhenmagmarisesuptothesurface[oftheearth]itmakescrackstomakespace.Themagmamightmeltsomepartsoftherocks,thenitcoolsdown.Thecrystalshavetimetogrowbecausethemagmacoolsslowly.Graniteisonethatcoolsslowly.Pegmatiteandgabbroarealsorocksthatformwhenmagmacoolsdown.(M.Martinez,personalcommunication,March24,2009)

ItwasevidentthatReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReadinghadapositiveimpactonstudentsreadingcomprehensionandcontentlearning.Nevertheless,oncethestudywasoveronlyoneoftheteachersoccasion-allycontinuedusingReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReading.

Unexpected Findings

TheparticipatingteachersattendedthreeprofessionaldevelopmentsessionsatthebeginningofthestudytolearnhowtoteachandimbedReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReadingintothecurriculum.Throughoutthetraining,theywereinvolvedandresponsive.Anunexpectedfinding,however,emergedfromthisstudy.Theteachers’eagernessdissipated

Rocío Dresser 75

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

soonaftertheyrealizedthatthestudyrequiredteacher-designedlessonsandassessments.Theirroleslowlymorphedfromactiveparticipantsintopassivedeliverersofinstruction.Theweekthatthestudywasgoingtobeginoneteacherdroppedoutcomplainingthathehadtoomuchwork.Theotherfourteacherscommentedthattheydidnothaveenoughtimeorthepropermaterialstodesignthelessonsandassessmentsforthestudy.TheyrequestedthatIteachthenewmethodstothechildren.Theyalsoaskedforthecompletesetoflessonplansandmaterialsneededforthedurationofthestudy.Therequestsweregranted.Thetwomethodswereintroducedtothestudentsandtheinitiallessonsweretaught.Ad-ditionally,aseriesofinterdisciplinarylanguageartsandsciencelessons,includingmaterials,wereprovided. Ayearafterthestudyended,theteacherswerecontactedandaskedto provide feedback on the interventions. The teachers found thesemethodstobevaluableandengaging.Oneteacherwrote,

IreallyenjoyedusingReciprocalTeachingandNarrowReading.Ilikedthateachstudenthadaspecificroleinreadingthetextandapplyingareadingstrategy.Itengagedallstudentsandmadedifficulttexts(e.g., science) more readable. (M. Rosell, personal communication,April15,2010)

Anotherteacheroffered,

Mystudentsdefinitelybecamemoreindependentlearners.Theysortofinternalizedwhatitmeanstotakechargeoftheirowneducationandhowtolearnwithouttheconstantguidanceofateacher.(A.Campbell,personalcommunication,April19,2010)

Itisunfortunatethattheseteachersdidnotcontinueimplementingtheinterventions.Theyallfeltthesemethodshadapositiveeffectonstudentachievementandinterest.Nevertheless,theyexpressedtheirinabilitytoaddnewinstructionalmethodstowhattheywerealreadydoingbecauseoftheirmanyresponsibilitiesandtimeconstraints.Oneteachercommented:

IamnotusingReciprocalTeachingrightnowbecauseofmyhesita-tionwithsettingupanewsystem[program].[I]amtoocaughtupintheday-to-dayandmanagingmycurrentsystems[scriptedprogram]thatIhaven’tfoundanopportunitytopushitinandkeepitgoing.(M.Rosell,personalcommunication,April15,2010)

Onecannothelpbutaskwhatmadehardworkinganddedicatedteachersarriveataplaceofsuchpowerlessnessandreluctancetowardsteacher-designed instruction? Ihave taught literacycourses forovertenyearsataStateUniversityinNorthernCalifornia.Thelasteight

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction76

Issues in Teacher Education

yearsteachingthesecourseshasbecomemoreandmorechallenging.Studentteachersoftencommentthattheeffectivepracticestheylearnedinclassdonotmatchscriptedreadingprogramstheyareaskedtouseintheschools.Theyarguethatthecurrenteducationaltrendhasleftthemtrappedintoprogramandtestdriveninstruction.Teachersfeelthattheseprogramsdonottakeintoconsiderationtheirprofessionaljudgmentortheindividualneedsofthestudents(Moustafa&Land,2002).Ateachercandidateshared:

Ibelievethatthesevariousteachingstyles[methods]areawonder-fulideabuttheschooldistrictsarenotimplementingthemintotheschools.Asteachers,ourhandsaretiedandwearetoldtoteachtothetestorgiveourstudentscountlessassessmentsbothformalandinfor-mal.Itappearsthattheseteachingstyles/methodsareconceptualized[contained]withinuniversities.Ourschooldistrictsandtheeducationsystemarenotintunewithbothteachersandstudents.(F.Burnham,personalcommunication,September18,2010)

The Unintended Consequences of Scripted Programs

ScriptedreadingprogramslikeOpen Court,Reading Mastery,andSuccess for Allhavebeenaroundforsometime(McGraw-HillCompa-nies,n.d.;BusinessRoundtable,n.d.;NationalAssociationofElementarySchoolPrincipals,2002;U.S.DepartmentofEducationInstituteofEduca-tionSciences,2006).Thepushfortheseprograms,however,beganwiththereleaseofastudybytheNationalReadingPanel(NRP)in2000insupportofsystematicphonicsandphonemicawarenessinstructioninearlygrades(McIntyre,Rightmyer,&Petrosko,2008;Milosovic,2007;U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesPublicHealthService,2000).TheNRPpanelwasnotabletoidentifywithcertaintythetypeofactivities,strategies,andinteractionsthatweremosteffective(U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,2002).Additionally,thepaneldidnotendorseaparticularscriptedprogramandcautionedthatmoreresearchshouldbedoneinthisarea.Inspiteofthequalificationsofthereport,thefindingsoftheNRPstudyinsupportofsystematicphonemicawarenessandphonicsinstructionintheearlygradeswereutilizedasafoundationforendorsingorpromotingReading First(Griffith,2008).Reading FirstunderTitleIofNoChildLeftBehind(NCLB)includesasectionthatstatesthatresearch-basedprogramsandmaterialsmustbeusedtoensurethateverychildwillbeabletoreadatgradelevelbytheendofthirdgrade(U.S.DepartmentofEducation,2002,p.27).Furthermore, school districts that adopt scientifically based readingprograms for students in kindergarten through third grade receive

Rocío Dresser 77

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

funding.Thisresolutionlimitsschooldistrictstocommerciallydesignedreadingprogramsandnarrowstheselectionofteachingmethodsthatcanbeused. Schoolteachersarecurrentlydealingwiththeunintendedrepercus-sionsoftheNCLBlegislation.Thedrivetocomplywithfederalandstatemandateshasleftteachersindissonancebetweentheirownphilosophyofeducationandthatoftheirschools(MacGillivray,Ardell,Curwen,&Palma,2004).Theyareaskedtofollowreadingprogramsstep-by-step,treatingteachinglikeamerecookingrecipe.Giroux(2010)callstheseclassrooms a “dead zone” where critical thinking, self-reflection andimaginationarebeinglefttooutsidesources.Thereisnoroomforcre-ativemethodsofinstructionlikethoseusedinMinerva’sclass.Scriptedinstructiontakestheplaceoftheteacher.Theprogramdetermineswhattheteacherwillsayanddo,aswellasthepaceofthelesson(Hall,2009;MacGillivray,Ardell,Curwen,&Palma,2004). Teachercandidatesfirstfeeltheclashbetweenwhattheylearninteacherpreparationprogramsandwhatisdoneinschoolswhentheyentertheteachingprofession.Manynoviceteachers,whoareforcedtoshiftfromdesigninginstructionthattargetstheindividualneedsofthestudents,oftenresist“aonefitsall”instructionthatreliesonexternalsolutions(Griffith,2008;MacGillivray,Ardell,Curwen,&Palma,2004).Someoftheteachersfightbackandtrytodesignmoreindividualizedcurriculum,butlatersurrenderaftertheyareadmonishedfornotfollowingtheschool’sadoptedscriptedprogram(MacGillivray,Ardell,Curwen,&Palma,2004).Thedrive to scripted instruction is contradictory towhat researchershavefoundtobeeffective.Itiswellknownthatitisnottheprogramormethodofinstructionthatmakesanimpactonstudentachievement.Itisaknowledgeableandeffectiveteacherwhomakesadifference(Arnon&Reichel,2007;Griffith,2008;Milosovic,2007;Ruddell,2006). Notonlydoesitappearthatscriptedliteracyprogramsinterferewithandundermineateacher’sabilitytoteachliteracy,butinfactevi-denceshowsthatscriptedprogramsnegativelyaffectstudents’readingdevelopment.Researchindicatesthatstudentsinschoolswherescriptedprogramswereusedfortenyearsormoretendtolagbehindstudentsinschoolswithnon-scriptedprograms.MoustafaandLand(2002)con-ductedastudyinCaliforniawithsecondthroughfifthgradestudentsfrom153schools.TheyfoundnoevidencethattheOpen Courtprogrampromoteshigherearlyreadingachievementamongchildrenfromlowsocio-economicgroups.Instead,theirresultsshowedthatstudentsinnon-scriptedprogramsoutperformedstudents inschoolsusingOpen Court. Other researchers have conducted similar short-term studiesandfoundnosignificantdifferencebetweenstudentsinphonics-driven

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction78

Issues in Teacher Education

programsandthoseinnon-scriptedprograms(McIntyre,Rightmyer,&Petrosko,2008). Amajorconcerneducatorshaveaboutscriptedreadingprogramsisthattheycantakeuptothreehoursperday,leavinglittletimetoteachothersubjects(Milosovic,2007;Moustafa&Land,2002).Eventhoughthereisablockoftimeallocatedforlanguagearts,manyteacherscom-plainthatthelessonsarerushed.Thereisnotenoughtimetorevisitcomplex concepts students have not mastered. In many low-incomeschools,thetimeallocatedtosubjects likescience,socialstudies,artandphysicaleducationisminimalornon-existent.Thiscanincreasethegapbetweenunderrepresentedandmoreaffluentstudentpopulations.Forexample,English learnersusingOpen CourthavebeenfoundtolagbehindEnglishspeakers(Lee,Ajayi&Richards,2007).Oneofthemainproblemsthesestudentsarefacingisthattheyarenotacquiringthenecessaryacademiclanguagerequiredforthemtosucceedinschool(August&Hakuta,1997;Cummins,2000).Theonlywaythestudentscanachievehighlevelsoflanguageandcontentknowledgeisiftheylearnthecontentandthelanguagerelatedtoallsubjects.Forinstance,itisdifficulttounderstandwhytheartshavebeenoneofthemostignoredcontentareasinschoolsinthelastfewyears.Theartspromoteinterestandlearningacrossallareasofthecurriculum(Appel,2006,Dresser,2003;Eisner,2003).Throughthearts,studentscanlearnmanythingsincludingmathematics(e.g.,shapes),vocabulary(e.g.,perspective,rhythmand surface), discipline and creativity. Brouillette (2010) found thattheartspromotesocio-cognitiveunderstandingamongEnglishlearn-ers.Studentslearnthatcomprehensionandexpressionareinfluencedbyculture.ThiscanhelpEnglishlearnersadaptmoreeasilytoanewcultureandlanguage.

Supporters of Scripted Programs

Supportersofscriptedinstructionclaimthattheseprogramsareeffectiveanduserfriendly.Open Court Readingisdescribedontheirwebsiteasaresearch-basedcurriculumgroundedinsystematic,explicitinstructionofphonemicawareness,phonics,wordknowledge,compre-hensionskills,inquirystrategies,andwriting(OpenCourt,2002).Thewebsitestatesthatstudentswill“mastervirtuallyeverysound/spellinginthelanguage”(http://www.opencourtresources.com/ocr/about/about.html).Someteacherslikethefactthattheseprogramspromotedirectphonemic instruction and have helpful graphic organizers (Griffith,2008).Teacherswhohavehadminimalexperienceteachingreadingandliteracyfindscriptedreadingprogramshelpfulbecausetheycomewith

Rocío Dresser 79

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

ateacher’sguide,students’textbooksandworkbooks.Mostimportantofall,noviceteacherslikefactthatmanyprogramsincludepre-designedlessonplans.Somearguethatteacherscanalwaysenhancescriptedinstructionlikeatalentedactorwhobringsthescriptofaplaytolife(Commwyras,2007).Supportersoftheseprogramsaffirmthattheresultscanbemeasuredobjectively.Additionally,somescriptedprogramshavedemonstratedanincreaseinliteracyrates(Milosovic,2007).McIntyre,Rightmyer,andPetrosko(2008)cautionthattherehavebeenmanystud-iesconductedontheeffectivenessofscriptedprograms.However,onlyafewofthearticlesthatemergedfromthesestudieshavebeenpublishedinpeer-reviewedjournals.Themajoritythemhavebeenpublishedinjournalsfromtheuniversitieswheretheseprogramsweredeveloped.

Alternative to Scripted Programs

Manydistrictsareusingscriptedprogramsasapanaceatosolvetheacademicproblemsofthestudents.Duncan-Owens(2009)quotesan old Chinese proverb as a metaphor to scripted instruction.Theproverb states that giving a man a fish only solves an immediateproblem.Teachingthemantofishprepareshimforalifeofsuccess.Insteadofrelyingonexpensivecommerciallydesignedprogramstoeducatechildren,districtsandteachereducationprogramscouldformpartnershipsthatsupportteachersduringtheinductionpartoftheircareers (Doolittle,Sudeck,&Rattigan,2008;Hamos,Bergin,Maki,Perez,Prival,Rainey,etal.,2009).Thepurposeshouldbetograduallyreleasethenoviceteacherintothechallengingprofessionofteachingwithouthavingtorelyonapre-packagedkittoteachreading(Barry,1997;Commwyras,2007). In1988theCaliforniaNewTeacherProject(CNTP)leadastudyandfoundthatnoviceteachersdobenefitfromamentoringprogramduringtheirinitialyearsworkingintheclassroom.Basedontheresearchfind-ingsoftheCNTPstudy,thestatesenatepassedSenateBill(SB)1422,whichcreatedtheBeginningTeacherSupportandAssessment(BTSA)Inductionprogram(Lovo,Cavazos,&Simmons,2006).BTSAprovidesindividualizedsupportandformativeassessmentfornewly-credentialteachers(CaliforniaInductionBTSABeginningTeachersSupportAs-sessment, 2008). In 1998, subsequent legislation (SB 2042) changedteacherrecruitment,certificationandlicensing.Traditionally,collegesanduniversitieswereresponsiblefortheeducationofteachers.Duetotheshortageofteachersduringthe1980s,thestateapprovedmultiplepathwaystocertificationincludingthecontextstoteacherpreparationtoschooldistrictsandcountyofficesofeducation(Hafner&Maxie,2006).

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction80

Issues in Teacher Education

TheSenateBillSB2042extendedtheeffortsofSB1422byforminganAdvisoryPanelforDevelopmentofTeacherPreparationStandards. AccordingtotheDevelopmentofTeacherReporttotheCaliforniaCommissiononTeacherCredentialing(2006),thepanelwasresponsiblenotonlyfordevelopingtheteacherpreparationstandards,butalsofor:

redesigningteacherpreparationprogramstoensuretheintegrationof subject matter studies and professional preparation, including astandard-basedteacherperformanceassessment,andprovidingatwoyearinductionprogramforallnewteachersasameanstoearntheirCaliforniaClearCredential.

TheobjectiveofBTSAInductionprogramsisforteacherstohaveasmoothtransitionfromtheirteacherpreparationprogramsintotheclassroom.Candidatesworkwithveteranteacherswhoareprimarilyresponsibleforprovidingrigorousindividualizedsupportandmentor-ing(Meckel&Rolland,2000).Someadditionalimportantgoalsoftheprogramincludeteacherretention,andstudentachievementthroughan inquiry based professional development model (Lovo, Cavazos, &Simmons,2006).Currentlegislationencouragesthecollaborationamongschooldistricts,universities,andcountyofficesofeducation. The NCATE Blue Ribbon Panel Report (2010) proposed anothermodel,aclinical teachereducationprogramthatgoesbeyond induc-tion.Thisrigorousclinicalprogramprovidesteachercandidateswiththeopportunitytolearnabouttheory,researchandcontentwhiletheyareteaching.Thepanelrecommendsthatteachereducationprogramsanddistrictsformpartnershipswithacommonmissionthatincludescarefulselectionofteachercandidatesandclearexpectations.Account-abilityisevidence-basedinthatthemeasurementofteachercandidates’effectiveness is based on student outcome.Partnerships suchas theoneproposedbytheBlueRibbonPanelcanserveasabridgethathelpsbeginningteachersconnectcourseworkwithclassroompractice.Thisclinicalmodelprovidesopportunitiesforprofessionaltrainingandsup-portforteachers,whichwillresultinacademicachievementforstudents(Mullen&Hutinger,2008). Asidefromstronginductionteachereducationprogramsnoviceteacherbenefitfrom:(a)developingasenseofmission(Banks,2001;Nieto,2005);(b)becomingknowledgeable(Ruddell,2006);and(c)developingasenseofmoralandsocialresponsibility(Freire,1970;Nelson&Harper,2006).

Sense of Mission

Teacherswhoviewteachingasamissiontendtohaveahighersenseofsatisfactionandasaresultcanbemoreeffective.Theyarededicated

Rocío Dresser 81

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

individualswhohaveasenseofperseverance(Ripley,2010).Thismeansthattheyaddresseverydaychallengeswithdeterminationandmaturity.Theyareflexibleandunderstandtheimportanceoflookingattheworldfromdifferentperspectives(Dresser,2003;Doll,1993;Freire,1970;Nelson&Harper,2006).Theyhavestudent-centeredclassroomswherestudentinterestandexperiencesaretakenintoconsiderationtodesigninstruc-tion.Theteacherknowsthecurriculumwell,butencouragesstudentstotaketheinitiative.Theyknowthatlearningoccurswhenstudentsareinvolvedandchallenged(Vygotsky,1962).ThiswasdifficulttodoinMinerva’sclassbecausetherewerestudentsatdifferentlinguisticandacademiclevels.However,teacherscanadaptthecurriculum,materi-alsandpracticestomakeitinterestingforthestudentsandtoensureacademicsuccess.Itisimportanttoviewlearningasanongoingprocessnotonlyforthechildrenbutalsoforteachers(Ada,2003).Teacherswithasenseofmissionareconstantlylookingforwaystoimprove.Teachersrequiredtousescriptedliteracyoftenlosethissenseofmissionwhentheyfeelthattheirknowledgeandexpertisearenotvalued.

Knowledgeable Teachers

Effectiveteachersareknowledgeableabouttheirstudentsandthecurriculum.They know the students’ linguistic and academic levels(Nieto,2005;Peregoy&Boyle,2000).Theseteachersareawareoftheirstudents’physical,emotional,social,andacademicstrengthsandneeds.Theychallengestudentstoviewissuesfromcomplexanddifferentper-spectives(Nelson&Harper,2006).Theyencouragelearnerstobecriticalthinkersandtoquestionthestatusquo(Doll,1993;Dresser,2003).Theseteachersknowthatforstudentstodowellthestudentsmustbeactivelearnersinsteadofpassivereceiversofknowledge.Studentsneedtobeinvolvedincurriculumdevelopmentandevaluation. Forexample,Minervaandherclassmateschosetowriteascriptandputontheplayaspartoftheirsocialstudiesfinal.Teacherswhoworkatschoolswheretheyplayapivotalroleincurriculumdevelopmentandimplementationtendtobeopentochangeandaremorepleasedwiththeirprofession(Griffith,2008).Theydesigninstructionthatisrigor-ousyetflexibleenoughtoincludetheinterestsoftheirstudents(Doll,1993;Gándara,2004).Theyusetextbooksandmaterialsasresourcestoenrichinstruction.Teachersshouldbeabletoadaptthecurriculum,includingscriptedreadingprograms,tomeettheneedsofalllearners.Theyshouldhavetimetoengageinmeaningfuldiscussionsandlearn-ingactivitieswiththestudents.

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction82

Issues in Teacher Education

Moral and Social Responsibility of Teachers

Teacherswithasenseofmoralandsocialresponsibilityareproac-tiveagentsof change.Theyappreciate their students’ linguisticandculturaldifferencesand they see thosedifferencesasassets insteadofweaknesses(Banks,2001;Ford,2010;Unrau,2003).Theypreparestudentstoberesponsiblecitizensoftheworld.Theylookatwaystoextendinstructionbeyondtheclassroomtohelpchildrenseethattheyarepartofalargercomplexsociety.Theseteachersusetechnologyandotherresourcestomakelearningandteachingalive. Most importantly, dedicated educators understand that their re-sponsibilitygoesbeyondtheclassroom(Nieto,2005;Shor,1992).Theyareinvolvedinschoolaswellaslocalassociationsandorganizationasawaytoimpacteducationallegislation.Manyteachersusingscriptedprogramsareafraidtorejectorevenquestionschooldistrictadoptedprograms,evenwhenstudentsare failing. Instead, they complyandfollowalimitedprepackagedmodelofeducation.

Conclusion

There isaneed to look carefullyat scriptedprogramsand theirimpactonstudentsandteachers.Thedriveforstandardizedcurriculahas leftmany childrenunpreparedand teachersdisillusionedabouttheirprofession(Griffith,2008;Milosovic,2007).Theeffectivenessoftheseprogramshasbeenquestionedassomeevidenceindicatestheyhavenotbeenfoundtomeettheneedsofindividualstudents.Scriptedprograms keep education and learning at a superficial level in thattheynarrowopportunitiesforteachersandstudentstobeinnovative.Theycannotdeviatefromthescriptedcurriculumtoexploreoransweraquestiontheymighthaveortoincludestudents’interests.Teachersfeelthatthereisnotenoughtimetoreviewortorevisitsomeimportantconcepts.NelsonandHarper(2006)callthisapproachthe“CliffNotes”methodtoeducation,whichleaveslittleroomfordeeperlevelsofthink-ingand“processingwhichshortchangesthestudentsbyprovidinganimpoverishededucationalexperience”(p.7). Motivatedandknowledgeableteachers,whoareaskedtorelinquishtheirviewsonbestpracticestofollowascriptedprogram,feeloverwhelmedandfrustrated.EventhoughthestudyonReciprocalTeachingandNar-rowReadingreferredtoearliershowedapositiveimpactonstudents’reading comprehension skills, vocabulary development and contentlearning,theteachersfelttheyhadnooptionbuttorevertbacktotheirscriptedreadingprogram.AsMartacommented,they“hadnotimetotrynewmethods”(M.Rosell,April15,2010,personalcommunication).

Rocío Dresser 83

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

Abetteroptiontoscriptedinstructionistoprepareteacherswiththenecessaryknowledge,dispositionsandskillstosucceed.Districtperson-nelandteacherpreparationinstructorsneedtotakeacloserlookatwaystoensureamoresecureandsuccessfulinductionpathforteachercandidates.Itisessentialforteacherstolearnandalsotoreceivethemessageinreturnfromtheirschooldistrictsthattheyplayapivotalpartinstudents’success(Nieto,2005).Similarly,teachersmustunderstandthatbeinggoodteachersisnotenough(Jong&Harper,2005).Educa-torsmustbecomeadvocatesfortheirstudentsbysearchingforwaystoimpactlegislation. Iwasaschoolteacherformanyyearsandrememberwellmyfirstyearofteaching.Ihadaclassof32veryenergeticfifth-gradebilingualstudents.OneofthemostenergeticoneswasMinerva.ThestudentswereallEnglishlearnerswithdifferentlinguisticabilitylevelsinEnglishandSpanish.Ibegantheschoolyearwithnothingintheclassroombutstudentdesksandaball.Thedistrictgaveme$92dollarstopurchasematerialsfortheyear.Manyofmystudentswerealreadyinvolvedingang-relatedactivities.Formanyofthemeducationwasnotaprioritybecausesomeoftheirbasicneedslikefoodandshelterwerenotmet.Oneofmystudentswasshotduringafightamongrivalgangsnexttoour school.Theprincipalwas caught sellingdrugs toanundercoverpoliceofficer.ThesewereonlyafewoftheproblemsIhadtoendureasanoviceteacher.TheonlywayIwasabletomakesocialstudiesandothercontentareasrelevantformystudentswasthroughtheartsandotherrelatedactivities(Dresser,2003). Iknow,therefore,howdifficultitisforteacherstotaketimeofffromtheirbusyschedulestoparticipateinotheractivitiesasidefromtheirclassroomresponsibilities.However,theonlywaylegislationcanchangeisifeducators,administrators,andthecommunitymakelegislatorsawareoftheproblemswithscriptedinstruction.Newinstructionalmodels,inwhichtextbooksandothermaterialsareusedtoenhancelearning,needtobedesigned.Strongpartnershipsbetweencollegesofeducationandschooldistrictsmustbeinplaceasawaytoprovidesupporttoteachercandidatesthroughlong-termmentoringmodels.Moreshorttermandlongitudinalresearchneedstobeconductedondifferentlanguageandliteracymodels.Finally, it is critical that the teachingprofessionbereturnedtothetrueexperts,theteachers.

ReferencesAda,A.F.(2003).A magical encounter: Latino children’s literature in the class-

room.Boston:Allyn&Bacon.

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction84

Issues in Teacher Education

August, D. & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda.Washington.D.C.:NationalAcademicPress.

Appel, M. (2006).Arts integration across the curriculum. Leadership, 36(2),14-17.

Arnon,S.,&Reichel,N.(2007).Whoistheidealteacher?AmI?Similarityanddifferenceinperceptionofstudentsofeducationregardingthequalitiesofagoodteacherandoftheirownqualitiesasteachers.Teachers & Teaching, 13(5),441-464.

Banks,J.(2001).Multiculturaleducation:Characteristicsandgoals.InJ.Banks&C.McGeeBanks(Eds.),Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives(pp.402-426).NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons.

Barry,A.(1997).Highschoolreadingprogramsrevisited.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(7),524.

Brouillette,L.(2010).Howtheartshelpchildrentocreatehealthysocialscripts:Exploringtheperceptionsofelementaryteachers.Arts Education Policy Review, 111(1),16-24.

Brown,A.,&Palincsar,A.(1985).Reciprocal teaching of comprehension strate-gies: A natural history of one program for enhancing learning.Cambridge,MA:Bolt,Beranek,&Newman.

CaliforniaCommissiononTeacherCredentialing.(2006).Report06-03.http://www.ctc.ca.gov/reports/CCTC-Report-Moving-Forward-2006.pdf

CaliforniaInductionBeginningTeacherSupportAssessment(BTSA).(2008).http://www.btsa.ca.gov/BTSA_basics.html

CaliforniaStateBoardofEducation.(1998).Content standards: Fourth grade sciences standards for California public schools.http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/sciencestnd.pdf

Cho,K.,Ahn,K.,&Krashen,S.(2005).Theeffectsofnarrowreadingofauthen-tictextsoninterestandreadingabilityinEnglishasaforeignlanguage.Reading Improvement, 42(1),58-64.

Commwyras,M.(2007).Scriptedreadinginstruction?What’sateachereducatortodo?Phi Delta Kappan, 88(5),404-407.

Cummins,J.(2000).Academiclanguagelearning,transformativepedagogy,andinformationtechnology:Towardsacriticalbalance.TESOL Quarterly, 34(3),537-548.

Doolittle,G.,Sudeck,M.,&Rattigan,P.(2008).Creatingprofessionallearningcommunities:Theworkofprofessionaldevelopmentschools.Theory into Practice, 47(4),303-310.

Doll,W.E.(1993).A post-modern perspective on curriculum.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.

Dresser,R.(2000).TeachingmetacognitvestrategiestoEnglish-languagelearnersintheupperelementarygrades:Aparticipatorystudywithbilingualteach-ers.(Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation,UniversityofSanFrancisco).

Dresser,R. (2003).Teachingbeyondthestandards inabilingualdemocraticclassroom.The Multilingual Educator Journal, 4(1),32-35.

Duffy-Hester,A. (1999).Teachingstrugglingreaders inelementaryschool:Areviewofclassroomreadingprogramsandprincipals foreducation.The Reading Teacher, 52(5),480-495.

Rocío Dresser 85

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

Duncan-Owens, D. (2009). Scripted reading programs: Fishing for success.Principal, 88(3)26-29.

Eisner,E.(2003).Theartsandthecreationofmind.Language Arts, 80(5),340-345.

Ford,D.(2010).Culturallyresponsiveclassrooms:Affirmingculturallydifferentgiftedstudents.Gifted Child Today, 33(1),50-53.

Freire,P.(1970).Pedagogy of the oppressed.NewYork:Continuum.Gándara,P.(2004).Buildingbridgestocollege.Educational Leadership, 62(3),

56-61.Griffith,R.(2008).Theimpactofascriptedreadingprogramonteachers’profes-

sionalspirits.Teaching & Learning, 22(3),121-133.Giroux,H.A.(2010).Rethinking education as the practice of freedom. Paulo Freire

and the promise of critical pedagogy.http://www.truthout.org/10309_Gir-oux_Freire

Jong,E.J.,&Harper,C.A.(2005).PreparingmainstreamteacherforEnglish-languagelearners:Isbeingagoodteachergoodenough?Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(2),101-124.

Hafner,A.L.,&Maxie,A.(2006).Lookingatanswersaboutreform:FindingsfromtheSB2042implementationstudy.Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1),85-102.

Hall,L.(2009).“Anecessarypartofgoodteaching”:Usingbookclubstodeveloppreserviceteachers’visionsofself.Literacy Research & Instruction, 48(4),298-317.

Hamos,J.,Bergin,K.,Maki,D.,Perez,L.,Prival,J.,Rainey,D.,&VanderPutten,E.(2009).Openingtheclassroomdoor:Professionallearningcommunitiesinthemathandsciencepartnershipprogram.Science Educator, 18(2),14-24.

Lee,S.,Ajayi,L.,&Richards,R. (2007).Teachers’perceptionsoftheefficacyoftheOpenCourtprogramforEnglishproficientandEnglishlanguagelearners.Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(3),19-33.

Leslie,L.,&Caldwell,J.S. (2005).Qualitative reading inventory.NewYork:Allyn&Bacon.

Lovo, P., Cavazos, L., & Simmons, D. (2006). From BTSA to induction:Thechangingroleofschooldistrictsinteachercredentialing.Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1),53-68.

MacGillivray,L.,Ardell,A.,Curwen,M.,&Palma,J.(2004).Colonizedteachers:Examiningthe implementationofascriptedreadingprogram.Teaching Education, 15(2),131-144.

McGraw-Hill Companies, Business Roundtable, & National Association ofElementarySchoolPrincipals (2002).Results with Open Court Reading.RetrievedfromERICdatabase.ED464189

McIntyre,E.,Rightmyer,E.,&Petrosko,J.(2008).Scriptedandnon-scriptedreadinginstructionalmodels:Effectsonthephonicsandreadingachieve-mentoffirst-gradestrugglingreaders.Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24(4),377-407.

Meckel,A.&Rolland,L.(2000).BTSAMODELSforsupportprovision.Educa-tional Leadership, 29(3),18-20.

The Impact of Scripted Literacy Instruction86

Issues in Teacher Education

Milosovic,S.(2007).Buildingacaseagainstscriptedreadingprograms.Educa-tion Digest, 73(1),27-30.

Moustafa,M.&LandR.E.(2002).Thereadingachievementofeconomically-disadvantagedchildreninurbanschoolsusingOpenCourtvs.comparablydisadvantagedchildreninurbanschoolsusingnon-scriptedreadingpro-grams.The Online Yearbook of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research. AERA SIG: Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research,pp.44-53.http://www.aera-ultr.org/Web%20Site%20Files/Publications/Publications.html.

Mullen,C.,&Hutinger,J.(2008).ThePrincipal’sroleinfosteringcollaborativelearningcommunities through facultystudygroupdevelopment.Theory into Practice, 47(4),276-285.

Nelson,C.,&Harper,V.(2006).Apedagogyofdifficulty:Preparingteacherstounderstand and integrate complexity in teaching and learning. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(2),7-21.

Nieto,S.(2005).Why we teach.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.OpenCourt.(2002).http://www.opencourtresources.com/ocr/about/about.htmlPeregoy,S.F.&Boyle,O.F.(2000).EnglishlearnersreadingEnglish:Whatwe

know,whatweneedtoknow.Theory into Practice, 39(4),237-248.Reportof theNationalReadingPanel. (2000).Teaching children to read: An

evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: NationalReadingPanel.Retrievedfromhttp://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/Pub-lications/summary.htm

Retter, J. (1996). Euclid assesses the California BTSA and finds the whole greater than the sum. Pathwise (TM)-the Educational Testing ServiceComponent. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED393843&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED393843

Ripley,A.(2010).Whatmakesagreatteacher?Atlantic Magazine.http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/01/what-makes-a-great-teacher/7841/3/?sms_ss=email&sms_ss=email.

Ruddell,R.B.(2006).Teaching children to read and write: Becoming an effective literacy teacher.Boston:Allyn&Bacon.

Savin-Baden,M.,&Wimpenny,K.(2007).Exploringandimplementingparticipatoryactionresearch.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 31(2),331-343.

Schmitt,N.&Carter,R.(2000).Thelexicaladvantagesofnarrowreadingforsecondlanguagelearners.TESOL, 9(1),4-9.

Shor,I.(1992).Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change.Chi-cago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

SuccessforAllFoundation.(2010).http://www.successforall.net/Takala,M.(2006).Theeffectsofreciprocalteachingonreadingcomprehension

inmainstreamandspecial(SLI)education.Scandinavian Journal Research, 50(5),559-576.

TheNationalCouncilforAccreditationofTeacherEducation.(2010).Transforming teacher education through clinical practice: A national strategy to prepare effective teachers.ReportoftheBlueRibbonPanelonClinicalPreparationandPartnershipsforImprovingStudentLearning.http://www.ncate.org/

Rocío Dresser 87

Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2012

LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zzeiB1OoqPk%3D&tabid=715Unrau,N.(2003).Content area reading and writing: Fostering literacies in middle

and high school cultures.Columbus,OH:Pearson,Merrill,PrenticeHall.U.S.DepartmentofEducationInstituteofEducationSciences.(2006).http://

www.successforall.net/.U.S.DepartmentofEducation.(2002).No Child Left Behind Act: A desktop refer-

ence.Jessup,MD:EDPubs,EducationalPublicationsCenterhttp://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/reference.pdf

U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesPublicHealthService.(2000).National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based as-sessment of the scientific research literature for reading and its implications or reading instruction.http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.cfm.

Vygotsky,L.S.(1962).Thought and language.Cambridge,MA:M.I.T.Press.