I totally agree with your assessment of the variables that we all deal with on 
a daily basis. My district also purchased SIPPS. The school that I used to work 
at tested all kids and placed them in ability based groups. I think the groups 
were reflective of many of the different factors that you described. I was 
always given one of the lower groups to work with. I would say that I taught 
the groups with fidelity but because of attention, language deprivation, new 
language learning and a plethora of other issues, I didn't see any startling 
results. I also didn't notice much transfer of this knowledge at my level (4th 
grade). The younger grades are still using this and many like the program but I 
am happy to say it is only used as an intervention.
Sue

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 26, 2012, at 3:29 PM, "Palmer, Jennifer" <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I have used SIPPS as a reading specialist in a non-title one school. I 
> abandoned doing it with fidelity as I felt that it did not work very well. A 
> few kids grew, but many did not. Our districts data did not support it either 
> and we probably had about 20 schools using it. Some with fidelity, some less 
> so. I tried modifying it...got slightly better results, but no better than 
> when I just did what I knew to be best for kids. 
> 
> As an administrator now in a Title One school, I totally understand the 
> accountability requirement. When you spend taxpayer money on a program you 
> have to be able to justify that it is money well-spent. I sometimes grit my 
> teeth at the time I spend away from instruction to deal with that, but I 
> fully understand that title one money must be used to help kids effectively. 
> 
> I will tell you at this point that my fabulous reading specialists in Title 
> One have also abandoned SIPPS.  
> 
> Now I would like to address the idea of 'fidelity'. As part of my doctoral 
> program, I have read a lot of research...and I have learned how to evaluate 
> the quality of research. In social science research, which education research 
> is, we have some serious ethical issues to consider when planning a study. 
> The first of these is that we are working with children. If we have an 
> intervention we think might work, it is unethical to deny some students the 
> opportunity for that intervention. How would you like YOUR children to be in 
> a control group, getting the same old thing, when your neighbor's child, 
> randomly assigned to an intervention group, is making progress?
> 
> So, to account for that, researchers who are trying to do experimental, or 
> quasi-experimental research have some serious obstacles to overcome. First, 
> the quality of the teacher. Even in a scripted program, like SIPPS, when 
> delivered with the exact same words might get different results. Suppose I am 
> the most loved teacher... and my neighbor across the hall hates kids and 
> yells at them all day. Do you really think that there would not be a 
> difference in the results between the two rooms? And then ,there is the kids. 
> We don't usually get kids randomly assigned to teachers. How many of us are 
> in schools where the most assertive parents get their kids into the classroom 
> that they want?  So, the kids in the classroom across the hall are 
> different...have less parental support...less time spent on homework.  AND 
> then, SIPPS in Title One where there are kids that are not recieiving 
> adequate food or health care, vs those that are in a upper middle class 
> school... ?
> 
> When we evaluate research...especially on these phonics programs, we have to 
> ask ourselves how the setting for the research is like, or unlike ours. We 
> have to ask how the teachers differ in levels of experience, and in those 
> affective qualities that are hard to measure. we have to ask how the children 
> are the same or different. We need to think about the size of the groups of 
> children and how far below level they are, and where they disabled, or ADD or 
> second language learners. 
> 
> I guess what I am arguing is this: We try to reduce the teacher variable by 
> making them use a script to see if the program works. I would argue that 
> there are too many other variables at play here to be able to make a 
> judgment. So, I use the same script as you do... I get results and you don't. 
> Why is that? Do I have better students? Do I have better classroom control? 
> Do I have more involved parents? Do I have a smaller class size? Do I have 
> fewer behavior problems? 
> 
> This is a situation where qualitative research techniques, which collect 
> different kinds of data...non-numerical data...might be more useful. So, your 
> class isn't doing well with SIPPS. Say we find that some of the kids aren't 
> doing well because they lack focus. Let's adjust the program and give it in 
> shorter segments so that they pay attention and see how it works. Teachers 
> are capable of that... if they understand how to identify the problem and 
> collect appropriate data. We can make more informed judgments about the 
> quality of the program IF we first ensure that the program is matched to kids 
> who will benefit from the intervention. Second, we enlist teachers and use 
> what they know to help us understand what is working and not working about a 
> program. And finally, we stop kidding ourselves that when we do a program 
> evaluation that we have controlled the variables by making teachers follow a 
> script. 
> 
> Incidently, a colleague and I were interested in the research behind SIPPS 
> and followed up on the studies cited in the manual that support it about a 
> year and half ago. First, there are not many. Second, they are all done by 
> the company that developed the program. Third, there were flaws in the 
> methodology. My district was fooled. We bought this as a research based 
> program... but no one actully looked at the research with a knowledgeable eye 
> before we spent the money. That's not to say that it is not working 
> elsewhere...and maybe there have been more studies done since I last looked 
> into it. It very well may be that there is new research supporting it, and I 
> would be happy to hear that there are students benefitting from it. We just 
> need to start asking questions with these programs when looking at the 
> research. How are these kids like or unlike mine? How are the teachers like 
> or unlike mine? How is the rest of the curriculum like and unlike mine? 
> (Maybe SIPPS works well with
>  kids in reading workshop but not kids in the Harcourt basal...for example.) 
> How will I fairly evaluate the program, realizing that it is truly impossible 
> to control the variables as we would for experimental research....
> 
> 
> Jennifer L. Palmer
> 
> Instructional Facilitator
> 
> National Board Certified Teacher
> 
> 
> 
> Magnolia Elementary (home school)
> 
> 901 Trimble Road
> 
> Joppa, MD 21085
> 
> 410-612-1553
> 
> Fax 410-612-1576
> 
> "In every child a touch of greatness!!'
> 
> Proud of our Title One School
> 
> 
> 
> Norrisville Elementary
> 
> 5302 Norrisville Road
> 
> White Hall, MD 21161
> 
> 410-692-7810
> 
> Fax 410-692-7812
> 
> Where Bright Futures Begin!!
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: [email protected] 
> [[email protected]] on behalf of 
> Stein, Ellen H. [[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 2:10 PM
> To: Mosaic: A Reading Comprehension Strategies Email Group
> Subject: Re: [MOSAIC] SIPPS
> 
> We use SIPPS in a much more structured way. The theory is if we don't use the 
> script provided with the program we have no check on whether the "program" 
> worked. Having purchased this and other interventions with title 1 funds, we 
> need accountability as to whether it worked or not. If we don't use them with 
> fidelity we don't know the reason for the success or failure.
> 
> Sent from my Droid Charge "Stacy.caudill" wrote:
> Regarding phonics instruction- has anyone ever heard of SIPPS? I have been 
> using it for several years. It allows me to assess students and work with 
> small leveled groups. Although the lessons are laid out I don't really think 
> of it as a program because I just use and adapt what is appropriate for my 
> students. I meet with each group for only about 15 minutes, and I have found 
> that it is very easy for me to build on when I am conferring in reader's and 
> writer's workshop or doing guided reading lessons.
> _______________________________________________
> Mosaic mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
> http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org
> 
> Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mosaic mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
> http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org
> 
> Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
> _______________________________________________
> Mosaic mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
> http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org
> 
> Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
> 

_______________________________________________
Mosaic mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org

Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive

Reply via email to