Academic programs target to achieve different objects, the primary objective always targets to improvement a particular aspect. Reading recovery program is one of the many such educational programs developed. The program was produced by New Zealand educator Marie Clay in the 1970s.The program targets to reduce the number of learners who have extreme difficulties with literacy and the cost of students to the education systems (Clay M.M 2005).The program is designed for children aged five and six who have low literacy after their first year in school. The trainers interact one to one with the student giving him or her greatly needed attention to improving literacy levels. Without giving this student this kind of help the students would continue to fall behind others.
The one-on-one interaction with the trainers or interactions in small groups help the students compensate for the slow learning curve. To provide teachers with the right knowledge for this special task the instructors go through a full year training program. The program is organized and controlled by the Reading Recovery Council of North America.
A diagnostic survey is administered to the entire student to determine the student who needs help. A decision concerning the student’s ability arrives from the result of the test. The students who do not meet the set target due to inabilities enroll in the program.
Training of the student is guided by the context of the word use. The teaching session will involve reading certain words, writing stories, reading small books, relating pictures with meanings and many other symbolic based strategies that will help boost the ability of the student. To assess the students, the trainer mainly applies non-methods that incorporate observations. Despite the program having many positives, it also has several shortcomings.
The programs remain unproven on its abilities. Different researchers have proven that it is difficult for the students going through the reading program to generalize the knowledge acquired for use in other areas. Elbaum, in his research argues that poor student doesn't make any gain even after going through the program (Elbaum, 2000). It is therefore very clear that after completing the program, the benefits may be lost.
The lack of a standardized assessment mechanism leads to failure to meet the objective of the program. The approach based mainly on the short term memory of remembering at the time may fail to generalize to other areas of application.
The program never reduces the need for special education. Despite the students going through the reading recovery program, they still need to go through the special education. According to (Melissa, 2006) several students who completes the reading recovery program does not go back to the other students to continue. The student requires special attention.
The program compared to other is expensive. Teachers are very costly to hire; this is the reason the government or private pool resources together in hiring trainers. This approach reduces the cost of training, sharing of cost shields the children guardians from incurring the total cost of hiring a teacher, which is very expensive practice.
In conclusion, reading recovery has created a misconception among a large population not only in America but also in many other countries. The approach, however, does not meet all the expectations of the people. There is a need for new methods to be adopted for help those with reading deficiencies.
References
Clay, M. M. (2002, 2006). An Observation Survey of early Literacy Achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann
Clay, M. Marie. (2005). Literacy lessons designed for individuals, Parts One and Two. Auckland: Heinemann Education.
Bonnie Grossen & Gail coulter. (2004) Reading recovery: an evaluation of benefits and cost, University of Oregon.
Melissa Farrall (2006) Reading Recovery: what do school districts get for their money? Wright laws.
