Amanda Eiman

CIL 607
LEXP 3 Reflection
March 3, 2014
I have been teaching Success for All (SFA) for three years. During that time I have
taught six different levels and have attended a number of trainings. I have even taught two
different editions of the curriculum. Last year, I had to create a presentation for one of my
graduate courses describing how and why SFA worked. I knew how to run the program and the
idea behind it but what I didnt know was the background of the program. Of course during
trainings, there were mentions that SFA has been around for years and that it is researched
based but I had never looked at it with a critical eye. I formed my opinions on the curriculum
based on my own experience. There have been many things that I have disliked about the SFA
curriculum and some that I have liked and seen work. After looking at the research and how
SFA came to be I have a better appreciation for the program. During my three years
teaching SFA I have seen results with my students. I have also seen some students remain at
the same level which is discouraging. Personally, I think the teacher has a large impact on the
success of the program.
When I began looking in the history of the curriculum of Success for All I was
concerned when I learned that it was first started by two Psychology students at Reed College
in Oregon. I wondered what two psychology students knew about teaching reading. After
reading about their research I felt more confident in the program. SFA has been researched
for many years and has also had outside reviewers evaluate the program. Though the
curriculum is very routine and scripted research shows that it is successful and I have seen it be
successful. Of course it is not guaranteed to work for every single student but I have seen the
curriculums effectiveness for a large number of my students.
After looking at the SFA curriculum more critically I feel that it is important for all
teachers to critique the curriculum they are teaching. Teachers should be aware of the
programs background and the research that proves its effectiveness. Our readings stated
that by engaging teachers in conversations that probe behind the scenes into these often
hidden spaces of curriculum development in literacy enables them to begin to see how critical
literacy offers a vehicle for the critique of practice grounded in their classroom experiences
(Stevens and Bean, 2007, p. 45). Teachers need to be looking at what they are teaching
critically and not just accepting it because it is what is mandated by the school. If I had looked
into my own programs and curriculum before I started forming opinions I might have had a
different outlook or at least a better understanding of why my school choose the specific
curriculum.

Reference:
Stevens, L.P. & Bean, T.W. (2007). Critical literacy: Context, research, and practice in the
K-12 classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.