Why Do Boys Fail?

• January 11, 2011 by Bill Jenkins, Ph.D.

So, why do boys fail? A great many teachers, school board members, district administrators and researchers have considered the implications of this question. As a scientist, a researcher, a business leader, and yes, as a man, the question both fascinates and disturbs me for any number of reasons, so I’d like to take a minute to talk about the question and its implications. Why do boys fail? Why indeed.

This question tells us point blank that boys are failing. But behind every question that starts with “why” there lies an assumed truth. When a child asks, “Why is the sky blue?” that question is based on the observation that, most certainly, the sky is blue. When someone--no matter how well informed--asks why our nation’s boys are failing, the underlying assumed truth is that yes, our boys are failing.

But are they?

According to Sara Mead and her 2006 survey of the applicable research, the issue is not necessarily that boys are failing. In fact, performance among males has been on the rise in recent years. Still, the achievement gap between males and females is also becoming more pronounced because performance among females is going up faster than their male counterparts.

So, what are the facts in regards to the performance of the boys? As an example, let’s look at the trend of boys’ performance in reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) that Mead references in her article:

• On the most recent NAEP administered in 2008, fourth grade boys did better in reading than on the previous two comparable assessments.  
• Long term data suggests that 9-year-old boys fared better on the 2004 and 2008 reading assessments than ever before, dating back to the first administering of the test in 1971.  
• Since 1971, reading performance among 13-year-olds remained stable, while among 17-year-olds performance had been declining through the 1990s. But, the most recent 2008 results show scores for both age groups are back on the rise.

It should be noted that performance for minority boys is “shockingly low” (Mead’s words) as compared to Caucasians, but, from 1995 to 2005, African American boys improved more than Caucasian and Hispanic boys or girls of any ethnicity.

But what does achievement look like when we compare the boys and the girls?

• Girls tend to outperform boys in reading.
• Boys tend to outperform girls in science and math.
• There has been no significant overall decline in the academic performance of boys relative to girls.

Overall, the picture of performance as snapshots as well as in trends over time paint an extremely complex picture, and the data can be creatively compiled to support any number of agendas.

The question itself, “Why do boys fail?” can be used to criticize educators and practices. It can be used to make a statement about the educational system. It can be used to cause shock, create fear for our nations’ future, or inspire us to action.

No matter how you interpret the question, I suggest that we all simply become as knowledgeable as possible of the facts, and use that understanding and inspiration--whether that drive is based in shock, fear or hope--to continue to improve teaching and our educational systems. Because in the end, our goal is that none should fail.

Here are a few resources to spur your understanding:

• Sara Mead, The Evidence Suggests Otherwise: The Truth About Boys and Girls (2006)
• Richard Whitmire, Why Boys Fail, Education Week Blog
• NEAP: The Nation’s Report Card

----------------------------------------------------------

 

1 Marianne Perie, Wendy S. Grigg, and Patricia L. Donahue, The Nation's Report Card: Reading 2005 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 2005).

2 Rampey, B.D., Dion, G.S., and Donahue, P.L. (2009). NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress (NCES 2009–479). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.

3 M. Perie, R. Moran, and A.D. Lutkus, NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic Progress: Three Decades of Student Achievement in Reading and Mathematics (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2005).

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Trends, Family Focus, Reading & Learning

Tags: academic problems, academic success, achievement gap, at-risk, struggling students

What Makes Superman So Great? Closing the Achievement Gap

• December 14, 2010 by Terri Zezula

He gets results! Rescuing the good citizens of Metropolis and instilling hope and wonder in all citizens. Yes, it’s a comical notion but we love to believe in the Superheroes and their ability to get things done!

When it comes to education, we look to our school district leaders to get things done – improved student achievement, high quality schools and low cost education programs that get maximum results. Especially in light of recent reports that show the US lagging behind other countries in reading, math, science and social studies. But there is one district in Louisiana that is getting things done – their results are proof that good leadership, a supporting community and proven education programs can turn a district around, from failing to proficient in a short amount of time.

Once a low performing district, the St. Mary Parish Public School System has achieved significant gains to become a role model for schools looking to make dramatic changes in their performance. After using the Fast ForWord® and Reading Assistant™ family of educational software products to strengthen students’ brain processing and literacy skills, students have increased their reading proficiency, and improved their achievement on state tests. In addition, fourth grade promotion rates have increased and test scores for student subgroups have improved, with the district making significant progress toward closing the achievement gap.

During the 2006-07 school year, St. Mary Parish started school-wide use of the Fast ForWord software at eight elementary schools that were in Academic Assistance. During the 2008-09 and 2009-10 school years, the Fast ForWord program was extended to the rest of the district. Students in grades three through five work with the Fast ForWord products 30, 40 or 50 minutes a day, depending on the school. Since 2008, the district has implemented Reading Assistant software as well.  Reading Assistant combines advanced speech-verification technology with the latest reading science to help students strengthen their fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary.

Results

• Improved state test scores
• Increased fourth grade promotion rate
• Fewer students required to attend summer remediation
• Reduced achievement gap

From 2006 to 2010 the percentage of fourth graders performing at or above the Basic level on the initial LEAP ELA test increased from 55 percent to 78 percent. In 2008, for the first time in a decade, the district exceeded the state average for the percentage of fourth graders reading at or above Basic on the initial ELA test. In addition, for the first time in years, the district had no schools labeled Academically Unacceptable.

Similarly, from 2006 to 2010, the percentage of fourth graders performing at or above Basic on the initial LEAP test rose from 59 to 79 percent in Math, from 53 to 69 percent in Science, and from 59 to 72 percent in Social Studies.

Fourth Grade Initial LEAP Test
Subject	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	Net Change*
ELA	53%	54%	60%	55%	64%	73%	73%	78%	+25%
Math	54%	54%	62%	59%	59%	71%	69%	79%	+25%
Science	45%	56%	59%	53%	59%	66%	67%	69%	+24%
Social Studies	56%	58%	55%	59%	66%	63%	63%	72%	+16%

*Net Change is measured from the year before Fast ForWord participation to 2010, i.e. 2006-2010 for 4th graders.

Fourth Grade Promotion Rates

In addition to improving LEAP scores, St. Mary Parish collected longitudinal data about the percentage of fourth grade students each year who were promoted to fifth grade. From 2006 to 2010, the district’s fourth grade promotion rate improved from 65 to 85 percent.

Both general education and special education students showed a positive trend in fourth grade promotion rates. Between 2006 and 2010, the fourth grade promotion rate improved from 67 to 88 percent for general education students, and from 33 to 59 percent for special education students.

 “Over the past four years, our fourth grade students have made astounding gains, outpacing their state counterparts in English language arts as well as math and science,” said Superintendent Dr. Donald Aguillard. “Our fourth graders now rank 14th in the state, signifying a continuance of annual proficiency increases since 2006. As a result, the number of fourth graders who require summer remediation has declined significantly, and students’ self-confidence and motivation have soared. In reading and across the curriculum, our students are clearly benefitting from our ongoing efforts to provide effective, targeted instruction and interventions through the Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant programs.”

St. Mary Parish Public School System is an example of a district that is getting results – making significant gains in reading, math, social studies and science. Providing the standard for making our education system No. 1 in the world again!

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Trends, Fast ForWord, Reading & Learning, Reading Assistant, Special Education

Tags: academic assistance, academic proficiency, academic success, accelerate learning, achievement gap, below grade level, elementary learning, elementary school learning, fluency, improving reading skills, increased test scores, LEAP, Louisiana, math, motivating students, reading comprehension, reading intervention, school leader effectiveness, science, social studies, struggling readers, struggling students, student reading growth, technology in education, vocabulary

Building a Foundation for Academic Success

• October 15, 2010 by Logan De Ley

Becoming an expert reader depends upon having extensive reading experience. Researchers often refer to an individual’s cumulative reading experience as their level of “print exposure,” and they have found that print exposure is linked to educational achievement, that it depends on reading fluency, and that it varies widely among both children and adults. Reading a lot will certainly make you a better reader, but does it have any other cognitive consequences? Cunningham and Stanovich conducted a series of studies to answer this question. Their studies consistently showed that sheer volume of reading is a powerful predictor of verbal skills and world knowledge. In addition, they concluded that “reading yields significant dividends for everyone—not just for the ‘smart kids’ or the more able readers.”

In another study, Cunningham and Stanovich collected data from a group of students over a ten year period, to examine the relationship between early skills and 11th grade print exposure. Across a range of 1st grade measures, the most important predictor they found was the students’ reading fluency, as measured by tests of decoding, word recognition, and comprehension. It is worth noting that they found an even stronger connection between 3rd and 5th grade reading fluency and 11th grade print exposure. This suggests that students who don’t get off to a quick start can overcome that setback, as long as they eventually become fluent readers.

Just how much does children’s exposure to print vary? Data collected by Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding, who investigated how much time fifth graders spent reading books outside of school. They found quite a range: children at the 10th percentile averaged only one tenth of a minute per day, while children at the 90th percentile averaged more than 20 minutes per day – 200 times as much – and the students who read more made greater gains in reading comprehension.

Students who don’t choose to read independently are usually non-fluent readers, and they may benefit from interventions that improve fluency and increase print exposure. As daunting as this gap looks, adding just 10 minutes of book reading time each day could substantially reduce it.  Increased exposure would move a student from the 30th percentile to somewhere above the 70th percentile in words read per year.

Teachers can’t control how their students spend their time outside of school. However, by providing well structured guided oral reading practice, they can help their students gain fluency and increase print exposure during the school day. Scientific Learning Reading Assistant™ software is a tool that helps teachers provide this kind of research-based reading intervention. Reading Assistant is designed to help students across a wide range of ages and ability levels to become more fluent readers.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Family Focus, Reading & Learning, Reading Assistant

Tags: academic success, achievement gap, child reading development, early learning, elementary school learning, improving reading skills

School Improvement Grant - Intervention for Failing Schools

• June 29, 2010 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

What is the School Improvement Grant?

“School Improvement Grants…are used to improve student achievement in Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring so as to enable those schools to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) and exit improvement status.” 
(www.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html)

How much money is available?  

FY 2009 School Improvement Grant appropriation: $546 million

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: $3 billion

Total: $3.546 billion

Who is eligible to apply? 

Formula grant states, who make sub-grants to school districts.

What is the timing of the grant? 

Application available: December 3, 2009

Application deadline (for states): February 8, 2010

Awarding and disbursement of School Improvement Grant funds 

“FY 2009 school improvement funds are available for obligation by SEAs and LEAs through September 30, 2011. In its application for these funds, an SEA may request a waiver of the period of availability to permit the SEA and its LEAs to obligate the funds through September 30, 2013.”   (www.ed.gov/programs/sif/applicant.html, click on “Application” link and go to page i)

Amount of LEA awards

LEA subgrants can range from $50,000 to $2 million. 

(www.ed.gov/programs/sif/faqs.doc  and www.ed.gov/programs/sif/guidance20100120.doc)

School Improvement Grant Requirements

“The secretary would require states to identify three tiers of schools:

• Tier I - The lowest-achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in a state, or the five lowest-performing Title I schools, whichever number is greater.
• Tier II – Equally low-achieving secondary schools that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds. The secretary proposes targeting some of these extremely low-achieving high schools and their feeder middle schools….
• Tier III – The remaining Title I schools in improvement, corrective action or restructuring that are not Tier I schools in the state.

[Recent legislation has allowed SEAs to use School Improvement Funds to serve “newly eligible” schools: certain low-achieving schools that are not Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.  For more information, go to: www.ed.gov/programs/sif/guidance20100120.doc, pages 11-12.]

In its application to the state, each school district would be required to demonstrate its commitment to raising student achievement by implementing, in each Tier I and Tier II school, one of the following rigorous interventions:

• Turnaround Model – This would include among other actions, replacing the principal and at least 50 percent of the school’s staff, adopting a new governance structure and implementing a new or revised instructional program.
• Restart Model – School districts would close failing schools and reopen them under the management of a charter school operator, a charter management organization or an educational management organization selected through a rigorous review process. A restart school would be required to admit, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend.
• School Closure – The district would close a failing school and enroll the students who attended that school in other high-achieving schools in the district.
• Transformational Model – Districts would address four specific areas: 1) developing teacher and school leader effectiveness, which includes replacing the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the transformational model, 2) implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies, 3) extending learning and teacher planning time and creating community-oriented schools, and 4) providing operating flexibility and sustained support.

Districts should choose the strategy that works best for each school. To ensure districts are choosing a variety of strategies, any district with nine or more schools in school improvement will not be allowed to use any single strategy in more than half of its schools.”   (http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/08/08262009.html)

How do Fast ForWord® and Reading Assistant™ products fit with the School Improvement Grant?

Improve student achievement

To date, students in almost 6,000 schools have achieved improvements in language or reading skills with the Fast ForWord reading intervention software products. Numerous independent studies as well as detailed research and outcomes data consistently confirm the effectiveness of the products. After using the Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant products, students have shown gains in achievement on a variety of standardized tests and state assessments. For example, Fast ForWord participants in Everett Publics Schools in Everett, Massachusetts, made significant gains in reading achievement following Fast ForWord product use during the 2007-2008 school year. Sixty-six percent of the students improved their MCAS Reading score in 2008 with an average improvement of 4.6 points. Scientific Learning has over 200 school based effectiveness and case reports documenting the substantial gains in achievement made by students after using the Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant products.

Help Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring so as to enable those schools to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) and exit improvement status  

With a background of over 30 years of neuroscience research and over 10 years of school site studies of effectiveness, Scientific Learning’s products have been shown to be proven intervention strategies for all schools, including those that are the lowest performing. The Fast ForWord Language and Fast ForWord Literacy series, with their cutting edge, neuroscience designed adaptivity and acoustically modified and enhanced sound, have been used successfully by students in low-performing schools in order to improve their cognitive, oral language, and reading skills. And both software series provide intensive support in a short period of time, from 4-16 weeks, depending on the scientifically validated protocol used.

Four Models of turning around schools:  

• Turnaround model: Implementing a new or revised instructional program – Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant fit well as part of a new or revised instructional program to use neuroscience based and proven learning techniques to turn around schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.
• ReStart Model: Schools closed and re-starting will need scientifically based and proven educational tools like Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant in order to start anew and provide their struggling students with the cognitive, oral language, and reading skills that they need to succeed in all subject areas.
• School Closure: Schools assimilating struggling students from closed schools will find that they need intervention products like Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant in order to help these students achieve grade level proficiency and assure that the school achieves or continues to achieve AYP.
• Transformational Model: Implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies – Fast ForWord and Reading Assistant fit well as part of or as a supplement to any comprehensive instructional reform strategy, and indeed, the effects of the products are comprehensive, affecting student performance in all subject areas. Extending learning...time - Scientific Learning’s software can be implemented easily during extended hours.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Fast ForWord, Reading Assistant, Scientific Learning Research

Tags: academic problems, academic success, achievement gap, ayp, below grade level, cognitive skills, elementary learning, elementary school learning, high school learning, improving reading skills, increased test scores, intervention, Massachusetts, MCAS, oral language skills, response to intervention tier i, response to intervention tier ii, rti tier i, rti tier ii, school leader effectiveness, struggling readers, struggling students, teacher effectiveness, title i

Can Scientific Learning Products Improve School Test Scores?

• June 2, 2010 by Norene Wiesen

When making a buying decision about educational software for a school or district, one of the most important questions to ask is whether the product is effective.  Administrators considering the Fast ForWord® and Reading Assistant™ products want to know: Do they help students learn and succeed?  Do they improve school test scores?  Are they evidence-based?

The answer to all of these questions is yes.  Scientific Learning products have been proven to improve language, reading, and cognitive skills as well as to improve school test scores on state assessments and other standardized tests for schools that follow the prescribed protocols.  Our Scientifically Based Research page is your starting point for exploring the 200+ studies that have evaluated the effectiveness of the programs and that serve as evidence of improved learning outcomes.

On average, students can see a 1-2 year improvement in reading level on school test scores in as little as 8-12 weeks.  English language learners, struggling readers, and special education students have all been positively impacted.  So have students performing at grade level and above.

Here are just a few examples:

Dallas Independent School District, TX (View PDF)

• Four year longitudinal study
• Fast ForWord participants significantly improved their reading achievement scores on the TAKS state assessment and maintained their improved reading skills
• Average decrease in the achievement gap for the 544 Fast ForWord participants was 25%

St. Mary Parish Public School System, LA (View PDF)

• After using Fast ForWord products, percent of Centerville, LA, 4th graders scoring proficient on state assessments exceeds state average
• Marked improvement in 4th grade Math, Science, and Social Studies test scores, highlights the impact of Fast Forword products on improving cognitive and foundational skills

Bridges Academy, Winter Springs, FL (View PDF)

• A private school serving students with learning disabilities with a goal of improving reading skills
• Case study on 2nd through 10th graders to evaluate the effects of adding Reading Assistant software to their existing Fast ForWord implementation
• Reading Assistant and Fast ForWord products are used concurrently and students are assessed before and after use
• In an average of three months, the students at the school improve their grade equivalent test scores by an average of one year and three months on the Basic Skills Composite, which combines the Word Identification and Word Attack subtests

The benefits of Scientific Learning products go beyond improving state assessment scores.  Researchers have measured improvements in self-esteem, communication skills such as vocabulary and pronunciation, improvements in listening and understanding, and stronger memory for things like phone numbers and event sequences.  Review our scientifically based research for detailed information.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: English Language Learners, Fast ForWord, Reading & Learning, Reading Assistant, Scientific Learning Research, Special Education

Tags: academic problems, academic success, achievement gap, brain training, child reading development, cognitive skills, elementary learning, elementary school learning, Florida, high school learning, improve test scores, improving reading skills, increased test scores, intervention, language learning, learning disabilities, literacy, Louisiana, math, memory, reading intervention, science, self-esteem, social studies, struggling readers, TAKS, Texas, vocabulary

What is the Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund?

• March 26, 2010 by Joseph Noble, Ph.D

What is the Investing in Innovation Fund (i3)?

The Investing in Innovation Fund, known as i3, is a grant program developed by the US Department of Education as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act with $650,000,000 in funding. The purpose of the i3 program is to:

 

Refer to the i3 RFP (Request For Proposal), also called the Application Packet, for more details on the i3 program and the application process.

The RFP, Frequently Asked Questions, a summary of the program and additional information can be found at: www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation

 

What is the timeline?

i3 has several key dates to note:

• April 1, 2010 – Intent to Apply – not required but strongly encouraged
• May 11, 2010 – Application due by 4:30 pm Eastern Time
• Late Spring/Early Summer – Proposals reviewed
• Early-Mid Summer – Matching funds must be secured by those projects to be awarded funding
• September 2010 – All funds awarded
• 2010 – 2015 – Funded projects may last 3 to 5 years

You are strongly encouraged to submit an intent to apply if you believe you meet the eligibility requirements and plan to submit a proposal for i3. This information will allow the Department of Education to create a more effective and efficient review process, and will allow for more adequate time for securing matching funds on the part of those projects identified for funding.

Who is eligible to receive i3 funds?

To apply for i3 funds, you must be one of the following:

• local educational agency (LEA)
• nonprofit organization in partnership with one or more LEAs 
• nonprofit organization in partnership with a consortium of schools

LEAs include public schools and public school districts. Private schools, colleges and universities are not LEAs, but may be included in i3 projects as partners.

Non-profit organizations can include colleges and universities, afterschool program providers, and others. (See the i3 glossary and RFP.)

 

Additional Eligibility Requirements

To be eligible for i3 funding, projects must:

• Maintain a Student Focus – “implement practices, strategies, or programs for high-need students”
• Demonstrate Historical Success – provide evidence demonstrating your past success
  • For an LEA applying on its own, the LEA must have “(a) closed achievement gaps or significantly increased achievement for all groups of students, and (b) achieved significant improvement in other areas,” such as “graduation rates or increased recruitment and placement of high-quality teachers and principals, as demonstrated with meaningful data.”
  • For partnerships involving a non-profit organization, the nonprofit must have “a record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, or retention through their record of work with an LEA or schools,” whether or not the LEA and school partners have a history of success.
  • Note: Without this history of success you will not be eligible to apply.
• Address an Absolute Priority – address one of the four absolute priorities listed on page 5 of the Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF)
• Partner with the Private Sector and Meet the Matching Requirement – secure matching funds from the private sector equal to 20% of the funds sought prior to program start date, or request a reduced matching level (to be granted in rare situations)
• Provide Evidence – meet the evidence requirement of the type of grant for which you are applying; see types of grants below and evidence requirements in the Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF)

Checklists for eligibility and definitions of the above can be found on the i3 website.

 

What will be funded under i3?

i3 is looking to fund projects based on several priorities within three types of projects, as described in detail in the RFP. At least one absolute priority must be met by each proposed project. It is anticipated that most projects involving Scientific Learning products and services will be Validation-type projects.

Types of Projects (Proposals must identify one of the following types):

• Scale Up - project designed to “scale up” practices, strategies, or programs for which there is strong evidence that the project will have a statistically significant effect in meeting the i3 goals. Scale-up projects are limited to $50 million/project and should scale up to a state, regional or national level.
• Validation - project that shows promise, but for which there is currently only moderate evidence that it will have a statistically significant effect in meeting i3 goals. Validation projects may reach $30 million/project and should scale up to a state or regional level.
• Development - project with high-potential and relatively untested practices, strategies, or programs whose efficacy should be systematically studied. Development projects range up to $5 million and should be able to further develop and scale up.

Points = the basis for evaluating each proposal. Think of a rubric in a classroom – points are given for each criteria met. Those with the highest points will receive funding.

Absolute Priorities (At least one required):

• Innovations that Support Effective Teachers and Principals
• Innovations that Improve the Use of Data
• Innovations that Complement the Implementation of High Standards and High Quality Assessments
• Innovations that Turn Around Persistently Low-performing Schools

Competitive Preference Priorities (Extra points awarded for each):

• Improve Early Learning Outcomes (particularly K-3)
• Support College Access and Success
• Address the Unique Needs of Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students
• Serve Schools in Rural LEAs

Examples of possible i3 projects from Scientific Learning:

• Scale-up – Successful use of Fast ForWord® in a group of districts or state is “scaled-up” by implementing its use nationally
• Validation – Promising success with Reading Assistant™ in a district is expanded to a larger region or state-wide to demonstrate broader effectiveness
• Development – A school collecting data on use of Fast ForWord expands its use district-wide and implements a stronger program to document effectiveness

Learn more:

Find out how Scientific Learning products fit with the i3 Fund.

See our Investing in Innovation (i3) Overview Booklet (PDF) for detailed information on eligibility requirements, preparing your i3 application, and getting help with your i3 application.

 

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Funding, Grants, and Stimulus, Fast ForWord, Reading Assistant

Tags: academic success, achievement gap, i3, innovation, investing in innovation, teacher impact

The 30 Million Word Gap in Language Experience Puts Kids At Risk

• January 14, 2010 by Bill Jenkins, Ph.D.

The achievement gap begins for many students before they enter the Kindergarten classroom. Children aren´t born with a vocabulary, yet educators and reading researchers have long identified the differences in word knowledge and vocabulary as key indicators of student readiness. Here are a couple of key findings:

A gap of 30 million words in language experience exists for some children prior to entering school. In 1995, Hart and Risley published findings from a study showing vast differences in the quantity and quality of language experience in the homes of children during the first 4 years of life.

Infants and young children with inadequate language development are at-risk for developing academic difficulties.¹ Without effective intervention, the majority of these students will exit high school with academic skills well below grade level.²

1 - Catts, 1993; Rissman, Curtis, and Tallal, 1990
2 - Shaywitz et al., 1999

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Brain Fitness, Reading & Learning

Tags: academic problems, academic success, achievement gap, at-risk, below grade level, intervention, language learning, vocabulary