Latest / Learn Literacy Podcast / 3. Nancy Redding - OGA Fellow

Transcript

3. Nancy Redding - OGA Fellow · Learn Literacy Podcast

• Cheryl Urbanczyk: Okay, welcome everyone to this episode of the Learn Literacy podcast where we celebrate language for life through teaching literacy through language and structure. I'm very excited today to do a practitioner profile and I'm here with Nancy Redding, a fellow fellow from California. So welcome, Nancy. Thank you for being here. Nancy Redding: Thanks for having me, Cheryl. Cheryl Urbanczyk: I just want to first thank you for being an instrumental part of my fellow journey because I believe we met when I was a fellow in training and you were hosting those sessions that gathered people together for sharing and learning ⁓ ⁓ was a very important time for me. So thank you. Nancy Redding: That was ⁓ a venue we had to chat with each other. And so, we're all excited that we maybe need to get back to it. Cheryl Urbanczyk: It really was. Exactly. That would be awesome. So I'm really interested in hearing about people's OG journeys. So, what was your OG journey like? When did you first learn about OG? How did you do your training? things like that. Nancy Redding: Okay, so I have an interesting story, perhaps a little different than some others. I was a young practitioner. ⁓ had just finished ⁓ master's in special education and two babies under three. And I looking to do some part-time work because I was so excited that I'd finished my master's between the babies ⁓ and wanted get back to doing some tutoring. or teaching of kids with dyslexia. I actually answered, this is how, I mean, this is late seventies. I an ⁓ ad the newspaper to work at a speech and learning clinic ⁓ here Santa Clara, California. And ⁓ went, interviewed, went work. And it so happened my, boss at the time, the gal who ran that learning clinic, was Marcia Henry, who was an OG practitioner very well known in the field. ⁓ was with the International Dyslexia Association ⁓ had just really finished her own OG training ⁓ with Rome and Jean Osmond in ⁓ Minnesota ⁓ and had moved to California. I am this young, just out of graduate school, working part time, never heard of Orton Gellingham. And she was very excited to bring me on board and teach me about it. was one those moments that just changed course of my life. Because she took under her wing, I worked with her three or four years on a very close She went over all my lesson plans when I tutored. We had a studio room with a two-way mirror and she would sit in the other room and watch me and then come back and really go through the whole thing. I mean, just from beginning to end taught me so much about structure of the language, about what Orton Gellingham was, about how effective it was. So with that, Cheryl Urbanczyk: Give Tati back. ⁓ Nancy Redding: I worked with her as I say three or four years. I was doing pullout tutoring in some schools here in California. school in California used our clinic as a push-in. We would go into the schools, ⁓ the would be us and we would, I guess is not the right word. We would then, they would give a space and we would work with some of the kids. who did have dyslexia or other kind of learning issue with language-based. so I did that for quite a while then actually left there. And my journey has constantly followed We are still good friends. We, after a while, began think, why are we reinventing the wheel all the time with these lessons? So we started writing a book together, which we called Tutor at the time and we self-published. And then it's been updated three or four times. It's now published through ProEd in Austin called Patterns for Success in Writing and Spelling. ⁓ they are Horton-Gillingham based lessons. beyond that, I worked for schools, elementary schools doing a lot of pull-out. tutoring work and was actually by a couple of schools here and there to do that. Fast forward I moved ⁓ to community college ⁓ and I in ⁓ college here California for about 15 years, working with adults had dyslexia. I a learning specialist, they called in the community college and we did testing ⁓ and tutoring and taught classes and did lot of counseling work, academic counseling with kids. Cheryl Urbanczyk: amazing because that's such an underserved population even now we feel adults like focus is on but that's like a whole nother digression ⁓ Nancy Redding: It was a fabulous experience. It is. I, having started out my career as a high school English teacher, it was very, it was a good fit for me to go back and work with older, they were young adults, not high school age, but, and so I did that. And then from there, I went back to high school and became a learning specialist in a high school. My kids were at a parochial high school here. They had no learning program to support the kids and they asked if I would start that. So I did that. And the way through, used my OG. I adapted OG to teach the college kids. We had what we call the writing class, writing and grammar. was a lot of spelling, a lot of helping them with how to break up words and then how to sentences, sentence level, paragraph level. But a lot of OG and then in the high school as well, used that a lot along with, helping with study skills ⁓ and the kids there. I left there in about 2015. I knew there was an academy. I had congenitally been ⁓ associated it, but had not ever joined it. But I decided that I wanted to teach Orton Gillingham. So ⁓ I to affiliate with the academy. in order to have the credibility of the academy behind me. Of course, in 1970s, there was no academy. So most of my OG career was done. actually, in California, used to teach. We did a work in Gillingham trainings. Marsha Henry and I and several others that were involved in the OG world. Again, before there was an academy in the 80s and 90s, we would hold summer courses. Anyway. I decided to become affiliated with the Academy, so I went back they were gracious to me. I began working with Karen Leopold. She was like the closest person geographically to There were a couple of retired OG fellows in California, but no one ⁓ who was OG work. Karen was in Denver, Colorado or in Boulder, Colorado. So I began to work with her and worked with her allowed me to work at the ⁓ certified So I worked to gain certified level and then worked with her for three years to gain fellow level. Then from there, I was ⁓ actually the fellow in the state of California at that time. And it was very lonely world. California was just beginning to pass some laws that were mandating some kind of work with our kids with dyslexia. And so all of a sudden the state was sort of waking up to OG training. It has become much more known and popular. And now I have two additional fellows here in California with several more, we hope, on the way. That was a long answer to a short question. Cheryl Urbanczyk: that's okay but it's amazing the time that you've been involved with OG and the variety of experiences are really amazing and considering that the time when you first learning let's say until now what have you seen in terms of changes in OG or the how OG is practiced do you see it is pretty much the same are there new trends old trends that type of Nancy Redding: Good question. I will preface it by saying that when ⁓ decided that I wanted, I would love to train teachers in ⁓ Gellingham. I at the possibilities and all of the people that I had admired, that I had worked with, ⁓ that had me through my time. When the academy and some of the other ⁓ organizations kind of came into being in the early ⁓ 90s. Most the people that I admired went to the academy, not all, but many. So ⁓ felt that was a really valid ⁓ and ⁓ a place me to be associated with. And I lucky that they were willing to take me. I have found Orton Gillingham to, I think when we started, it was, always structured, sequential, cumulative, all those things, everything there, it was not ⁓ strictly as it is with the academy. I felt it was a ⁓ little bit loose. You were given a little bit more freedom. And I think that's there were not certifying agencies at the time. No one certified you. But Marsha was very clear with me about, I felt like I was very true to what Orton and Anna Gellingham wanted. But ⁓ now the academy that I'm training teachers, I do see a tightening of that. ⁓ see coming, the guidelines being more clear and sometimes a little more strict. Cheryl Urbanczyk: I think there is that tension with ⁓ certifying and trying to work through that. ⁓ noticed the same. But think because you worked with Marsha Henry and she worked with Paula Roem, your line of connection is ⁓ really as opposed to maybe people with a few ⁓ fellows in between, let's say. ⁓ Nancy Redding: Yes. Yeah, right. Cheryl Urbanczyk: I hate to use the term telephone game, like, what I mean, like over time things change and you take something and you, we all kind of make it our own ⁓ in of training and what we do. We'll still trying to stick to, ⁓ the were given the curriculums, like all that kind of thing. ⁓ So. Nancy Redding: I agree. And I have to, I mean, I will really say, feel like the curriculum that the Academy ⁓ and supports and fabulous. ⁓ It's excellent curriculum. Over and over over again from teachers, I hear, why did we not have this in our teacher training? ⁓ Learning. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Yeah, okay. Nancy Redding: structure of our language, learning how the brain learns to read, learning the steps that we need to follow in order to be more fluent readers and spellers and accurate spellers is ⁓ amazing. I love the framework. And think with when you want to expand something like OG, you really need the guidelines. I'm not necessarily opposed to them. Sometimes I think, ⁓ we get a little stricter. But I do feel it's necessary in order to keep the ⁓ fidelity to Orton Gillingham. And if that's what we want to do, then that's what we do. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Yeah, no, that's an amazing explanation. And I think insightful because so much even of the regular conversation out there is about fidelity and instructional fidelity and implementation fidelity. Even if you're using a program or something like that. And, there's one ⁓ way of as in one just reading from the script in my book. You know what I mean? As opposed to fidelity when you have Nancy Redding: Okay. Cheryl Urbanczyk: a practitioner who has this body of knowledge and then is trying to apply it to meet the unique profile of the student in front of you. And they're just kind of two different things. Nancy Redding: Absolutely, absolutely. And what I tell teachers too is that what you learn in an Orton Gellingham training is not just how to do something, but why. And your depth of knowledge about the language and how to teach structured literacy is so deep that then you have the ability to be in to individualize, whether it's for a class. or a one-to-one individual, you have that ability because you have the knowledge base. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Yeah, completely And I love that you mentioned the why, because one thing I'm always talking about with in my is that cognitive piece. You need to explain this to the student why you're doing it this way, how you're integrating all these things. It's It's not like things as an ROTE, you know, it's understanding why and ⁓ drawing upon that of the learner. Nancy Redding: Yes. Cheryl Urbanczyk: to apply these things. Nancy Redding: And many of our kids, think one of the strengths of our kids with dyslexia is often that reasoning piece. It's that ability to reason. And because this does not automatically come to them because they do have either phonological and or orthographic they knowing the rules ⁓ because they can. spell with fidelity, they can in accuracy and say, I know why I use DGE in that word. I know why I'm going to divide that word this way in order to read it more carefully and comfortably. So our kids love knowing the lies. Cheryl Urbanczyk: ⁓ I think so too. And I think the teachers love learning the whys, but it's also reminding them to share that with the students. So the students see that too. that's neat. So terms of your current practice, are you still seeing students? Are you mostly training or what it like? Nancy Redding: Mm-hmm. Yep. Right. Yeah. I am not seeing students and I miss it. I might get back to you. Cheryl Urbanczyk: I think everybody does. want to have a student, but I'm trying to create some time in the day. ⁓ Nancy Redding: But when I became a fellow, at the same time California passed these literacy, know, these dyslexia law, awareness really just exploded. I could not keep up with the trainings and felt like I had to really do that while the moment was there. So it's than full time right now, trying up with that. And I'm a lone practitioner. I'm not involved with a university or an institution ⁓ or although I'm a fellow of record of a school. I'm not ⁓ involved any ⁓ Cheryl Urbanczyk: music. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Nancy Redding: bigger organizations. it's, it's I can do, ⁓ but I do the kids and hopefully we'll get back there soon. But I will tell you, I have nine grandchildren ⁓ and I work with and I my practice and my fun working with them. ⁓ do have two that have little issues with reading and and other things. Cheryl Urbanczyk: So much fun. Nancy Redding: So it's been fun to be able to work with them and get a little practice in. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Well, congratulations on so many grandchildren. Nancy Redding: good. very, very lucky. And ⁓ I'm lucky the like to work with me. And ⁓ right now I'm going to work with ⁓ a high school, one my high school grandchildren who actually is mildly dyslexic ⁓ and has some spelling She's and ⁓ we're working through some together for her writing for her high school English and ⁓ history classes. That's been great. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Mm-hmm. Yeah. ⁓ I you're presenting at the conference this year. unfortunately, I'm not able to go. But you've been I think every year since I can remember. Why is that so important to you to do that? It's a lot of work. I, it's, ⁓ thinking of good putting things together on top of what sounds like a very full day for you. Why is that important work for you? Nancy Redding: Before I answer that, I will say that I have always really enjoyed the presentations that you have done. I think that you have a good understanding of this, but I will say for our audience. ⁓ It's very important for me to be able to with the other members of the academy. And this is a way to do it. I do feel lucky that I'm in a place in my life where I've had a lot of fabulous experiences using OG. from five years old, my oldest student in the community college was a 70 year old grandfather ⁓ who he'd never written a letter to his grandchild and wanted to be better at it. So I've just very lucky to have a lot of experiences ⁓ and I... I feel this is the giving back portion of my life. ⁓ like sharing it. I hope I ⁓ ⁓ to influence others do the same. Cheryl Urbanczyk: ⁓ agree with all of that. It's really great. And I think, ⁓ when we give back and support and meet people, it's really nice, though it's sometimes it bugs me. It's like, when's the idea coming? ⁓ How can we this together? ⁓ You know what mean? Nancy Redding: Yes, I agree. I agree. And I just try and think about what's, what am I reading and seeing in the ⁓ different venues about our OG world and world of kids ⁓ who are to read spell. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Alright, so what's your topic this year and why did you decide on that? Nancy Redding: I'm going to talk about how orthographic mapping is supported by all of the different sections of the Orton-Gillingham lesson. And spoken ⁓ on orthographic before and actually was very privileged to work with Nancy Mather on ⁓ one of the of one of her books on orthographic mapping. And so ⁓ I researched it. Cheryl Urbanczyk: good. Nancy Redding: and decided that, and I think the term orthographic mapping for a while was sort of this vague term and people were not sure about it. So a couple of years ago, I did something with orthographic mapping and I'm coming back again just to tie it more closely maybe to our Orton Gillingham lesson. Cheryl Urbanczyk: That's a good one. sometimes ⁓ the more learn and the more I see things, the more I realize how things were always there in OG, but we kind of are seeing it again the first time. And it's like, okay, I don't have to make everything ⁓ proved in OG lesson, but it's just kind of weird like that. And I feel mapping is one of those things, because the practice and the fluency building is there like in ⁓ all. Nancy Redding: in all sections, right? And you just layer one on the other. I think I ⁓ will include, which I have before, some practices which I think are particularly good for that. But know an important piece in fluency. so just helping teachers understand, again, it's the why. Why am I doing this? And how does that lead to being a more fluent a more accurate speller? Cheryl Urbanczyk: the sections. I think the role of practice in there too is important and that underestimation of the amount of practice that people need. Nancy Redding: Yes. Well, yes, the amount of practice that our kids need. You're right. Good. Cheryl Urbanczyk: So is there anything, speaking about OG, is there an interest you have that you want to learn more about or like a concept or a topic that you'd like to explore more to keep developing yourself as a practitioner? Nancy Redding: One of the things that I'm looking at right now because, well, that I'm looking at right now because of some work I'm doing reading the digital age, which is something, ⁓ and has been doing a lot of work with. It really, in many ways, changing the reading circuit of the brains of our kids. And I think it's important to ⁓ really understand Cheryl Urbanczyk: one. That's amusing. Right. Nancy Redding: And to see how we can perhaps help our kids be more biliterate readers. And that is knowing how to read a screen, a quick surface look, and also how to do some deep reading, whether it's on a screen or in a book. And helping our kids understand the difference between those. That's kind of a new topic I think. Research. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Yes. ⁓ That's amazing. Yeah, and I think so greatly needed because I'm sure we're probably hearing about and seeing the same kind of research articles coming out about how the brain is different reading on a screen, but. I kind of don't want people to receive that as being reactionary. I just think it means we have to understand that to provide appropriate instruction, right? How do we do it in this context? How do we do it in this context? And a student just reads in print for a bit to consolidate and practice before trying on a screen. Nancy Redding: Absolutely. Cheryl Urbanczyk: even with all the assistive technology that they give to dyslexic kids, sometimes it makes me laugh because they, if you can't spell, you have to figure it out or voice to text or all these things. We don't want another layer ⁓ of barrier for them, right? Reading on a screen, let's say. Yeah. ⁓ Nancy Redding: Absolutely. Right, right. And I think just having, again, having our students, particularly our middle and high school students, understand the differences and think about the purpose of their reading when they're reading, again, whether it is on a screen or in a book, and able to ⁓ match the of reading they do to what the purpose of their reading is. Cheryl Urbanczyk: I think Nancy Redding: Because our kids all grew up with screens, I don't think you're seeing the difference we are maybe. Those us who didn't have screens when you grew up and learned to read. Cheryl Urbanczyk: You think? Yeah. Exactly. I agree. And one thing I talk about, maybe because I was old enough that I was taught steady skills. And I think we should bring those back because that kind of is exactly what you're talking about, right? These old fashioned steady skills. How do I read what I have? Should I make an outline? Do I find the topic sentence? Do I find my three points in the paragraph or, what have you? But I feel I don't know if teachers just assume that kids are bringing them or they just fell out of favor with more exploratory teaching or I don't know. Nancy Redding: Agree. That metacognition about how am I doing and why am I doing this and am I being successful at my goal is really important for kids. And how do I best reach the goals? Whether it is an outline, a graphic map, drawing pictures about it, reciting things over and over while you're lifting weights. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Yeah. Mm-hmm. Right. Nancy Redding: What is it that helps you put things into long-term memory and reach the goal stage? Cheryl Urbanczyk: Mm-hmm, yeah, exactly. There's lots of different stuff. you followed much of like the science of learning movement and kind of incorporated that into some of ⁓ Yeah, I think that's. ⁓ Nancy Redding: Absolutely. I have. think it's very interesting. think is a good progression. It does not take away from the need for literacy. The science of and structured literacy is really all about all pieces ⁓ of ⁓ Scarborough's But decoding piece been maybe more than it should. by but particularly emphasized by the outer world because they thought it was only about decoding. But I think the reason that came to the forefront is because it was the piece that maybe we weren't doing as well as teachers as we could. ⁓ So that need was there. And once teachers ⁓ have that, we also Cheryl Urbanczyk: ⁓ It was so obvious too, right? You can't decode. Nancy Redding: are looking at every strand of that, background knowledge, vocabulary, text structure, all of that needs to be incorporated and is all part of structured literacy. And in particular, something we do in OG. Cheryl Urbanczyk: just ⁓ final question before we start to wrap up. It makes me think of your learning with Marsha Henry and her role, the very important role she had in morphology so early on. How are you seeing ⁓ the more interest in morphology and ⁓ how that's of incorporated with OG in some of your work? Nancy Redding: I love that question because as you can well imagine, since I worked with Marcia, it was a big part of my training. So it's always been a part of my training and it's one of my favorite pieces. I love the fact that it is becoming much more valued, always may be valued, but... Cheryl Urbanczyk: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Mm-hmm. A lot of that. Yeah. Me too. Nancy Redding: I would always hear people say, I'm not comfortable with morphology. I'm not sure, but more and more courses are available and more people are learning about it using it. And it's so important. I love it. ⁓ and etymology of words is really the basis of our spelling system. So ⁓ important for that. For older students, it's a way through morphology you can get to some of those really basic skills that some of our kids might be missing still be ⁓ on that meaning piece morphology. Cheryl Urbanczyk: think so too. think for older students, ⁓ matches more their cognitive pathway and where they are that we can find ways to support them without making it look like, they're reading the frog on the log or something. ⁓ Nancy Redding: Exactly, exactly. It is great. So I'm thrilled with the sort of explosion of interest and courses and ⁓ using a lot of morphology in their lessons. Yeah. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Mm-hmm. Yeah, me too. I have Marsha's books and if people aren't aware of Marsha Henry and her books, just Google them and find them and they're amazing. okay. In terms of wrapping up, the final question I like to ask people is just sharing a bit of advice that you want to pay forward or maybe that you wish you had heard or learned when you were starting out. What would you share in addition ⁓ to all things you've already shared? Nancy Redding: Okay, great. Again, I really like that question. I that for practitioners of OG, I would say ⁓ to take step at a time, not to look too ahead, to really think about learning structure of language, learning how to apply it in your teaching and in with the kids, again, not moving too fast, understanding how practice they need ⁓ and so you working to help them ⁓ develop skills and their to the fullest and reach their potential. And I would say one child at a time to think about our, sometimes you're overwhelmed by the need for so many kids to learn to be better readers and spellers. And we are overwhelmed by the numbers of kids in our society who need this kind of work. One child a time, one step at a time. ⁓ It really can make a big difference. ⁓ the we spread the word about teaching these kids and how to teach them, I think more people we will influence to follow our steps to learn Orton-Gillingham and using it in school system today. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Great. Thank you so much for that advice. resonates with me because it's easy to get lost in the overwhelm and needs ⁓ and the lesson planning when practitioners are first learning, but that's part of your process of learning as a practitioner, how we put together lessons when you can't just Google the worksheet for Nancy Redding: It is. Cheryl Urbanczyk: the student you have, right? Nancy Redding: when you start out with a child, you think there's so much to teach them. ⁓ my gosh, I've got to go fast. ⁓ The reason with you ⁓ usually is it did go too fast and they were not grabbing onto those concepts. You can't teach concept as Anna ⁓ Gillingham said, go as fast as you can, as slow as you must. ⁓ But what you are them is that there's an internal structure of words. Cheryl Urbanczyk: Mm-hmm. Right. Nancy Redding: whether it's changing the sound in a CVC word or it's changing morphine in a much longer word. And once kids learn that concept and they are using it, begin to teach themselves. So I think it's important to... Cheryl Urbanczyk: get that confidence that they can do it and it all feeds them together. Well, thank you so much, Nancy. I really appreciate this conversation and learning more about you and hearing your thoughts on things. And I'm sure people will enjoy that as well. So thank you. Nancy Redding: Cheryl, thank you so much for having me. I am very honored to be on and ⁓ I thank you and I love the work you do. And I think this kind of a medium very important for our OG practitioners to. grow in their own field and in their own ⁓ Cheryl Urbanczyk: That's part of what we're trying to do is to, the goal really getting the knowledge out there to support kids at the end of the day. And the OG is a great vehicle for that. Yeah. Amazing. Okay. Thank you. Nancy Redding: Absolutely. We're all there for the kids. That's what it's about. Good. Well, thanks, Cheryl. Alrighty. Bye-bye.