Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i2R5A4m03708; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 00:10:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 00:10:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <Sea2-F106HUBVc5gm6q0002b5ba@hotmail.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1216] here we go again X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 2351 Lines: 58 Tom and others: A couple issues. First, is there such a thing as plagiarism on the lists? Tom, your message is copied and pasted verbatim from the website you linked to; there is a link but you didn't say anything to indicate these are not your words. Remember the confusion over whether another message was in your words or Bob Sweet's? You could avoid this by using quotation marks and clearly citing direct quotes. Secondly, the study and results are reported as part of a commerical message intended to persuade people to buy a product. The source and purpose of the writing definitely affect the credibility, to me at least. I am more and more suspicious of the motives of some phonics-advocates, and the validity of their reports, when they resort, over and over, to what feels to me like sleazy, less-than-honest tactics to convince an audience they must assume will not check their claims. Caveat emptor. One good thing, Tom always highlights the importance of critical thinking even though he only talks about decoding. Eileen From: tom zurinskas <tzurinskas@yahoo.com> Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@nifl.gov To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1212] Re: Readability Formulas Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:12:32 -0500 (EST) http://waterford.org/index.jsp In 1989, Waterford participated in the New York City Public Schools Integrated Systems Project. One of the most important findings of the $10 million project was that intervention is needed at a much earlier age than previously thought. The study showed that without early intervention an achievement gap between at-risk and average students develops and increases exponentially during the early years of education. When intervention is delayed, at-risk students face tremendous obstacles to achieving success. For example, if delayed until the fourth grade, an at-risk student's rate of learning must increase four times just to catch up with the average student's. Moreover, intervention at grade three or four often takes four to six times the resources needed to yield the same results as an intervention that begins in the earlier grades. _________________________________________________________________ Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar – FREE! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:44 EST