professornana (professornana) wrote,
professornana
professornana

  • Location:
  • Mood:

In good company

In addition to rating teacher prep programs, NCTQ has offered another "service" by indicating texts that are 'ACCEPTABLE," "NOT RELEVANT" and "UNACCEPTABLE." Guess which category most of my favorite texts FALL IN? Guess where one of my own books falls? You can view the entire list here: http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/RdgTextRatings. If you still have dog-eared copies of books by Atwell, Graves, Miller, Beers, and some of the other leading voices in literature, writing, reading, and literacy be forewarned. None of them are deemed acceptable. Here is the rationale for the ratings: "As a first step in the rating process, required textbooks in reading courses are grouped into one of four categories according to their content: Core Texts, Supplementary Texts, Acceptable Overview and Not-Relevant Texts. Core Texts are broad topic texts that cover all five components of effective reading instruction.  Supplementary Texts may address one or a combination of components, but not all five.  Acceptable Overview are research summaries of overviews, not textbooks focused on reading instruction.  Texts placed in the Not-Relevant category do not address early reading instruction. Not-applicable texts may be devoted to teacher preparation in other important literacy areas such as writing instruction or literature appreciation. Not-Relevant texts are not rated."

A few observations here (and this should not surprise anyone who has read word one about the flaws in the NCTQ ratings of programs in COEs across the country):

1. In order to be acceptable, the text must address the five components of scientifically proven effective instruction (i.e., phonics, etc.).
2. These are books for early reading instruction and, apparently, middle school, tweens, etc. do not matter.
3. From the many pages of texts, only a handful are deemed acceptable.

I feel sort of happy that I am not acceptable given the criteria NCTQ uses. However, I am bothered a little by the use of the term NOT RELEVANT given to NAKED READING. But since it is sitting on the same PD shelf as so many others, I guess I should feel honored. If anyone had a doubt about the agenda of this "report," those should now be put to rest. How sad that IN THE MIDDLE and THE BOOK WHISPERER and YELLOW BRICK ROADS are considered irrelevant. I hope that their appearance on this list will spur folks (as I am spurred when a book lands on the censored list) to buy some more copies and pass them around. They are relevant; they will remain relevant as long as we have as our goal this: we want to create lifelong learners. Now, I think I shall go and reread my Kindle copy of THE BOOK WHISPERER. Not relevant. Ha!
Tags: relevance
Subscribe

  • And the ALAYMA go to...

    I was up early this morning, so I could set up the computer for the live webcast of the ALA Youth Media Awards. After I did that, I joined in an…

  • ending with a bang not a whimper

    My final duty as outgoing chair of the 2013 Odyssey Committee was to host the awards ceremony yesterday. Before the ceremony, the audio publishers…

  • shooting ourselves in the foot

    Today at ALA in Chicago, the teens came to talk books to the BFYA Committee. There will be some teens attending other functions here as well. Most…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments