LETTERS.

Painful But Appropriate

AASA President Karl Hertz reminds us of some painful facts about the state of American childhood in his President's Corner column ("A Great Squirming Away From Our Responsibility") in the October issue.

As our economy booms and many of us prosper beyond expectations, it is proper and encouraging for the president of our organization to bring the condition of so many of this nation's children into our focus. If indeed the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, this country is looking at serious trouble in the future.

DICK SWANTZ

Superintendent, School District of LaCrosse, LaCrosse, Wis.

Commending Class Size

Thank you for the article on class size by Charles Achilles ("Small Classes, Big Possibilities," October 1997). It is a long-awaited clarion call.

He cites a remarkable data curve on learning as a function of class size, published by Glass and Smith in the 1970s. Policy papers continued to assert that "class size makes no difference." That was true when one considered only the interval on the data curve above 25 students per class.

We must fund smaller classes and well-planned evaluation research on their benefits and their cost-effectiveness.

RICK SPRAGUE

Executive Director,

CHARMSS Collaborative,

Randolph, Mass.

Where's the Documented Support?

I grow weary of respected scholars, like Bill Honig ("Reading the Right Way," September 1997), who write articles that contrast whole language and phonics when there is no dichotomy there. These authors are less well-informed than they should be and they do literacy education a disservice, especially when their views are published in magazines for school system leaders.

I counted over 10 research references that never were identified. Perhaps you should ask Honig to read the excellent article ("Whose Claims Are Valid?") by Richard Allington in the same issue.

Ignorance coupled with lack of evidence is the greatest enemy of public education.

JUDITH N. THELEN

Post-President,

International Reading Association President,

Allegany County Board of Education,

Cumberland, Md.

Bill Honig responds:

The magazine's editors requested that I keep the citations to a minimum, but the documentation for the points I made is voluminous and overwhelming. Most of it is cited in my book, How to Teach Our Children to Read. Every point in the article stems from extensively researched studies by leading researchers.

Judith Thelan was president of the International Reading Association, which has been one of the strongest voices in the country trying to keep this research from practitioners often by the use of ridicule, name-calling or intentional mis-citation. The main points of my article still stand: (1) many children need specific, direct and linguistically organized instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, sounding out words and decoding to learn to read; (2) most children's reading performance will be enhanced if they are checked out on our alphabetic system; and (3) few classrooms offer the comprehensive reading program I have described.

A Fair View of Reading Recovery

I basically was pleased with the objectivity of Richard Colvin in his comprehensive article, "Reading Recovery Revisited," in September. He examined the subject from various perspectives.

As a former teacher, principal, assistant superintendent and university professor for 32 years, I would like to address some of the points he makes.

The significant costs incurred by school districts that implement Reading Recovery relate to the professional development of Reading Recovery teachers, which includes the initial year-long training and subsequent periodic professional development experiences. The costs of books for struggling young readers (purchased from various publishers) are a one-time investment, and they can be used by all children for many years.

Reading Recovery was developed as an early intervention for first-grade children at risk of failing to learn to read, usually the children in the lowest quartile of achievement. Reading Recovery is not intended for the rest of the school population. Research is replete with studies that show that the most successful educational programs target children at the earliest possible ages. It is patently invalid to compare Reading Recovery with whole-school programs.

Reading Recovery is not intended for children who have excessive neurological or psychological disorders. It is not a cure-all for all children or for education's ills. Children who are disadvantaged only because of lack of literacy experiences can learn to read and write with the co-constructive assistance of Reading Recovery teachers.

V. ANNE ALLEN

Allen and Allen Educational Consultants, Little Rock, Ark.

Appreciated the Discount Tip

As the administrator of a 500-student district in rural northeastern Colorado, I wish to thank Kari Arfstrom for her Federal Dateline ("Plan Now for E-Rate Discounts This Winter") in the October issue.

We are interested in applying for the discount because of our T-1 lines to the local community college. The savings would allow us to do more for our children.

I'm afraid many people are not aware of this great opportunity.

CHARLES G. JOHNSON

Superintendent, Akron School District R-1, Akron, Colo.