Education Opinion

The Monitor Vs. The Daily: Different Takes On Reading First

By Alexander Russo — February 23, 2007 1 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

“In its most recent investigation into Reading First - the fifth of six planned reports questioning the program’s management - the department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) also alleges that federal officials knowingly stacked panels at a series of training academies with members who favored two commercial reading programs,” according to a Title I Monitor story. “In doing so, the OIG says the Education Department (ED) created the impression that the two programs, Direct Instruction and Open Court, topped an agency “approved list” of Reading First programs.” To read the OIG report, go here.

Meantime, Ed Daily has a broader -- and seemingly much kinder -- look at the Reading First era, including comments from former RF deputy Sandi Jacobs. It opens: “Reading First, the No Child Left Behind Act’s K-3 reading initiative, has, for all its troubles, managed to quietly shepherd an evolution in reading instruction that has most researchers, educators and policymakers agreeing on at least one thing: Science can tell us much about the way children become readers.” From the piece, it seems like local educators aren’t as outraged -- or surprised -- as some of the national folks.

The opinions expressed in This Week In Education are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.