施瓦茨对查普曼和图默阅读复苏数据分析的回应:谁的意识形态和谁的政治?

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
J. Chapman, W. Tunmer
{"title":"施瓦茨对查普曼和图默阅读复苏数据分析的回应:谁的意识形态和谁的政治?","authors":"J. Chapman, W. Tunmer","doi":"10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In critiquing our paper on “The literacy performance of ex-Reading Recovery students between two and four years following participation in the program: Is this intervention effective for students with early reading difficulties?”, Schwartz argues that we have engaged in pursuing political and ideological agendas as part of our ongoing attacks on the Reading Recovery program. We reject his claims and argue that if we are ideological, it is related to our commitment to the use of rigorous scientific research to examine claims made in favor of the Reading Recovery program. We also argue that Reading Recovery was adopted in New Zealand largely for political reasons rather than on the basis of carefully controlled research. We stand by our interpretation of various studies in New Zealand that call into question the effectiveness of Reading Recovery in terms of the stated goals for the program.","PeriodicalId":44419,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","volume":"21 1","pages":"59 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Schwartz’s response to Chapman and Tunmer’s analysis of reading recovery data: Whose ideology and whose politics?\",\"authors\":\"J. Chapman, W. Tunmer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In critiquing our paper on “The literacy performance of ex-Reading Recovery students between two and four years following participation in the program: Is this intervention effective for students with early reading difficulties?”, Schwartz argues that we have engaged in pursuing political and ideological agendas as part of our ongoing attacks on the Reading Recovery program. We reject his claims and argue that if we are ideological, it is related to our commitment to the use of rigorous scientific research to examine claims made in favor of the Reading Recovery program. We also argue that Reading Recovery was adopted in New Zealand largely for political reasons rather than on the basis of carefully controlled research. We stand by our interpretation of various studies in New Zealand that call into question the effectiveness of Reading Recovery in terms of the stated goals for the program.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"59 - 67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19404158.2016.1202847","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在评论我们的论文“阅读恢复前学生参与该计划后2至4年的读写能力表现:这种干预对早期阅读困难的学生有效吗?”,施瓦茨认为,我们一直在追求政治和意识形态议程,这是我们对阅读恢复计划的持续攻击的一部分。我们反对他的说法,并认为,如果我们是意识形态的,这与我们承诺使用严格的科学研究来检验支持阅读恢复计划的主张有关。我们还认为,阅读恢复在新西兰的采用主要是出于政治原因,而不是基于仔细控制的研究。我们坚持我们对新西兰各种研究的解释,这些研究对阅读恢复计划的既定目标的有效性提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Schwartz’s response to Chapman and Tunmer’s analysis of reading recovery data: Whose ideology and whose politics?
Abstract In critiquing our paper on “The literacy performance of ex-Reading Recovery students between two and four years following participation in the program: Is this intervention effective for students with early reading difficulties?”, Schwartz argues that we have engaged in pursuing political and ideological agendas as part of our ongoing attacks on the Reading Recovery program. We reject his claims and argue that if we are ideological, it is related to our commitment to the use of rigorous scientific research to examine claims made in favor of the Reading Recovery program. We also argue that Reading Recovery was adopted in New Zealand largely for political reasons rather than on the basis of carefully controlled research. We stand by our interpretation of various studies in New Zealand that call into question the effectiveness of Reading Recovery in terms of the stated goals for the program.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信