69ý

69ý & Literacy

Publishers Question Fairness of ‘69ý First’ Process

By Kathleen Kennedy Manzo — September 07, 2005 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print
Email Copy URL

State grant reviewers gave Dr. Cupp’s Readers a big, fat zero rating on one Georgia school’s 69ý First application. Only later did its publisher find out that at least one of those reviewers had never laid eyes on the program.

That experience underscores how some small publishers feel about the federal initiative: They haven’t gotten a fair shake.

See Also

Frustrated and furious, Cindy Cupp, who publishes the books bearing her name, set out on a campaign to expose what she sees as unfair practices that give products from big publishers preference over lesser-known products without regard for their offerings’ research base.

She filed complaints this past spring with the Georgia inspector general. He is investigating and found enough merit in them to forward some of the complaints to federal authorities.

Until that point, though, other publishers were reluctant to complain, fearing that doing so would hurt their chances of getting approved for 69ý First funding, according to Stephen D. Driesler, the executive director of the school division of the Association of American Publishers.

Ms. Cupp’s dogged criticism inspired federal complaints by the Baltimore-based Success for All Foundation and the North American 69ý Recovery Council, in Columbus, Ohio. (“Ga. Officials Admit Mistakes on ‘69ý First’ Rules,” May 11, 2005.)

Benefits for Some

The Washington-based school division of the AAP has complained to the U.S. Department of Education several times that a few commercial programs appear to be favored for use in 69ý First schools. And, in a letter this past March to the University of Oregon, the publishers’ organization raised questions about the university’s evaluations of a select group of core reading programs and intervention products. Those reviews were widely distributed to states as a guide for selecting the kinds of research-based texts the federal law requires grantees to purchase under 69ý First.

The university did not respond to the letter but has suspended the reviews.

Recent events have renewed some publishers’ concerns, said Mr. Driesler, noting that few are willing to criticize the process publicly. For example, the federally financed Eastern Regional 69ý First Technical Assistance Center, based at Florida State University, has published guides to help teachers align only selected commercial reading programs to the 69ý First provisions.

Georgia officials, meanwhile, offered extra workshops last month for only those teachers who use the selected programs.

Publishers contend that such practices serve as official endorsements by states and the federal government, thus benefiting one publisher over another.

But Christopher J. Doherty, the director of the 69ý First program for the U.S. Department of Education, said it is a state’s prerogative to hold program-specific professional development.

“I don’t dismiss the point you make on behalf of the [other publishers],” he said. “But to not provide program-specific professional development and additional training, … we would have to refuse a direct state request” for help.

Stifling Innovation?

Ms. Cupp, however, disagrees. “If the federal government is getting in the business of writing reading programs, they should tell us all, because it is real hard for me to compete with the federal government,” she said. “My taxpayer dollars should not be spent giving an inside edge to my competitor’s product.”

As Ms. Cupp sought answers to why the grant from Daughtry Elementary School in Jackson, Ga., had been denied, she got the run-around from state officials and the technical-assistance center at Florida State, she contends.

Georgia 69ý First officials at first told her she had to get outside evaluations before the texts could be used in 69ý First schools. Later, they acknowledged that such a review was not required. In the meantime, the grant cycle had waned, Daughtry Elementary administrators had resubmitted their application after removing Dr. Cupp’s Readers as its choice, and the Savannah-based publisher felt she had little chance of penetrating the 69ý First market.

The No Child Left Behind Act, which authorized 69ý First, was bound to give a competitive edge to offerings that most closely reflected the program’s tenets, said Robert W. Sweet Jr., who helped write the 69ý First legislation as a senior staff member for the Republican-led House Education and the Workforce Committee. He recently left his government post to return to the National Right to Read Foundation, an organization that promotes phonics instruction.

“All of these things are commercially driven,” Mr. Sweet said, referring to initiatives to improve education. “There are some people, some groups, some universities who have been involved in trying to promote research-based education long before the 69ý First program came about,” and may have had an advantage.

But Susan B. Neuman, the former assistant secretary of education responsible for the 69ý First program’s launch, said that she and others working on the $1 billion-a-year initiative had hoped it would open up the marketplace to new and innovative reading programs reflecting the latest research on how children learn to read. Instead, she said, 69ý First led to tinkering with commercial products that had been around for years.

Related Tags:

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Artificial Intelligence Webinar
AI and Educational Leadership: Driving Innovation and Equity
Discover how to leverage AI to transform teaching, leadership, and administration. Network with experts and learn practical strategies.
Content provided by 
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School Climate & Safety Webinar
Investing in Success: Leading a Culture of Safety and Support
Content provided by 
Assessment K-12 Essentials Forum Making Competency-Based Learning a Reality
Join this free virtual event to hear from educators and experts working to implement competency-based education.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.

Read Next

69ý & Literacy Quiz Quiz Yourself: How Much Do You Know About Student Literacy Data?
Answer 7 questions about the importance of student literacy data and how to collect and use it.
69ý & Literacy 69ý Interventions for Older 69ý May Be Missing a Key Component
Many older elementary and middle school students still struggle with foundational reading skills.
6 min read
An illustration of a high school student looking in to an open book with black, gray, and red letters circling about around him.
iStock/Getty
69ý & Literacy Q&A What Is Disciplinary Literacy?
Tim Shanahan's research helped crystallize the idea of "discipline specific literacy." How has it evolved?
10 min read
Illustration of directional signs and book.
Dan Page for Education Week
69ý & Literacy What Happens When Every Teacher in a School Has the Tools to Improve 69ý?
In a whole-school literacy initiative, students learn metacognitive tools to help with reading and then apply them across content areas.
8 min read
Illustration of words being highlighted.
Dan Page for Education Week