This article has been retrieved   times since August 30, 2008

A Response to Steubing et al., “Effects of Systematic Phonics Instruction are Practically Significant”: The Origin of the National Reading Panel Gregory Camilli Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey Sun Hee Kim Teachers College, Columbia University Sadako Vargas Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey Citation: Camilli, G., Kim, S. H., & Vargas, S. (2008). A response to Steubing et al., “Effects of systematic phonics instruction are practically significant”: The origins of the National Reading Panel. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(16). Retrieved [date] from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v16n16/. Abstract A recent article by Stuebing, Barth, Cirino, Francis and Fletcher critiqued the findings of Camilli, Vargas, and Yurecko (2003) and Camilli, Wolfe, and Smith (2006). With a methodological argument, they attempted to resolve the conflict between these studies and the original report Teaching Children to Read (National Reading Panel, 2000). In response, it is argued that three issues must be considered in a fair assessment of the NRP report—program labels or bins, alternative bins, and the role of literacy activities in reading instruction. In this light, three hypotheses ventured by Stuebing et al. are analyzed. It is concluded that the argument by Stuebing et al. does not reveal flaws in the original NRP report by Camilli et al. (2003), though some points of agreement are acknowledged. Keywords: early reading; phonics instruction; literacy instruction; reading difficulties; National Reading Panel; meta-analysis Una Respuesta a Steubing et al., "Efectos de Instrucción Fonética Sistemática son Prácticamente Importantes": El Origen del Comité Nacional sobre Lectura Resumen Un artículo reciente de Stuebing, Barth, Cirino, Francis y Fletcher critica las conclusiones de Camilli, Vargas, y Yurecko (2003) y Camilli, Wolfe, y Smith (2006). Con un argumento metodológico, estos autores trataron de resolver el conflicto entre estos estudios y el informe original, Enseñar a leer a los niños (Comité Nacional sobre Lectura, 2000). En respuesta, se argumenta que tres cuestiones deben ser considerados en una evaluación justa del CNL: informe-programa de etiquetas o cajas, cajas alternativas, y el papel de la actividades de alfabetización en la instrucción de la lectura. Desde este punto de vista, se analizan tres hipótesis presentadas por Stuebing et al.. Se concluye que el argumento de Stuebing et al. no revela fallas en el informe original CNL de Camilli et al. (2003), aunque se reconocen algunos puntos de acuerdo. Palabras clave: principios de lectura; instrucción fonética; alfabetización; dificultades en la lectura; Comité Nacional sobre Lectura; meta-análisis. Access this article in PDF format. Education Policy Analysis Archives, class size, David Berliner, Gene Glass, Michael Apple, Sherman Dorn, Gustavo Fischman, Pablo Gentili, education policy analysis archives, epaa, aape, education, Paulo Freire, reforma educativa, archivos analiticos politicas educativas, neoliberalismo, descentralizacion, evaluacion, pruebas nacionales, estandares, lectura, revista educativa, revista academica, pruebas, sindicatos docentes, gremios, profesores, universidades, escuelas publicas, escuelas privadas, escuelas charter, policy, educational policy, policy analysis, vouchers, charter schools, evaluation, educational evaluation, education reform, school reform, educational reform, educational journals, accountability, school choice, standards, higher education, academic standards, testing, assessment, public policy, teaching, journal, educational research, private schools, homeschooling, home schooling, tuition, teacher unions, educational assessment,política, política educacional, análise de política, comprovantes, escolas da carta patente, avaliação, avaliação educacional, reforma dainstrução, reforma de escola, reforma educacional, jornais educacionais, accountability, escolha da escola, educacion popular; pedagogia critica, Education Policy Analysis Archives, class size, David Berliner, Gene Glass, Michael Apple, Sherman Dorn, Gustavo Fischman, Pablo Gentili, education policy analysis archives, epaa, aape, education, Paulo Freire, reforma educativa, archivos analiticos politicas educativas, neoliberalismo, descentralizacion, evaluacion, pruebas nacionales, estandares, lectura, revista educativa, revista academica, pruebas, sindicatos docentes, gremios, profesores, universidades, escuelas publicas, escuelas privadas, escuelas charter, policy, educational policy, policy analysis, vouchers, charter schools, evaluation, educational evaluation, education reform, school reform, educational reform, educational journals, accountability, school choice, standards, higher education, academic standards, testing, assessment, public policy, teaching, journal, educational research, private schools, homeschooling, home schooling, tuition, teacher unions, educational assessment,política, política educacional, análise de política, comprovantes, escolas da carta patente, avaliação, avaliação educacional, reforma da instrução, reforma de escola, reforma educacional, jornais educacionais, accountability, escolha da escola   Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this abstract and the associated article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, it is distributed for non-commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or EPAA. EPAA is published jointly by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate School of Education at Arizona State University and the College of Education at the University of South Florida. Articles are indexed by Directory of Open Access Journals, ERIC, H.W. Wilson & Co, and SCOPUS. Please contribute commentary at http://epaa.info/wordpress/ and send errata notes to Sherman Dorn (epaa-editor@shermandorn.com).