Tuesday, February 24, 2026

Free Speech, Esther, That Damn List, and Purim: A Parable

Well. I've been doin' some research. Most of y'all who follow me here know that and what I think about it. But I do want to be helpful - not an overall pain in the ass. I know I write with tone. Insert eyeroll. I get it.

As I've been collaborating with folks, I'm realizing some stuff about free speech. The folks who know what's going on...they cain't say a thing. They cain't even say anything if they quit or they get fired. 

Teachers and school leaders are afeared of saying stuff that'd make the government mad at 'em enough to impact their livelihoods. And some of them are afeard of bein' a part of organizations that say stuff a lot of people need them to say. 

Free speech ain't what we think it is in Texas education anyway.  So what am I gonna do? I have a lot of information that I think will be beneficial. And it will piss off a lot of folks. But it might make things better if I put on my Polyanna hat - don't we want kids who can read and think on their own? I thought that's what we were doin' here. 

So I wrote myself into somethin silly. The Bible always seems like a good place to start for guidance. Turns out there is a story in there about a lady who did speak up when others couldn't. I started writing for myself - to help me make some decisions and next steps. Hoping to be wise. Even though it's a parable, it ends with a call to action, invitation, and a recipe. Let me know if you wanna review the research or hear the scoop. I need some help. And the good book does say that a plan with many advisors rarely fails.

A Purim Parable: How to Speak Up

There was this chick back in the day that spoke up for her people. Basically, this Haman guy was going to have all

her folks killed. He had it all planned out with the King of Persia. This woman knew that telling the king - Xerces I -

about the plan might get her killed. One - because the king didn’t ask for her ideas. Second - because she had never

told Xerxes that she was Jewish. Yeah, she was the Queen of Persia - but she’d have to admit to being Jewish to her

husband. Get killed for talking to the king without permission. Expose her identity and die. That’s not a win-win

situation in any strategy 

But - she knew that she needed help from the community. She also knew she had to have moral clarity. She asked her

relatives and Jewish community to fast, pray, and prepare. And she worked on herself to build the courage to approach

the king. She looked at the original cause for Hamon to request genocide and compared it to decency and Persion

norms. “If I perish, I perish,” she decided. 

So, she planned her entrance. No one could really go in and talk to the king. The guards would just kill them unless

the king held out his gold stick -even the Queen. She put on all her fancy clothes - the ones that indicated her status

and royalty and just stood where Xerces could see her. She just stood there. She let HIM make the choice of letting her

in. 

Xerces asks her what she wants. Offers her up to half of the Persion kingdom. But this woman, she lay low, she don’t

say nothin’. Kinda like Brer Rabbit. She doesn't mention that Hamon is harassing her family. She doesn’t mention

that she knows Xerces told Harmon it was ok to kill all of her people - including her. Be she don’t say none of  that. 

She invites Xerces and Harmon to a banquet! 

At the banquet, Xerces tries to find out what she really wants. But she won’t say and invites them to another banquet

the following day. Basically, she knows how to work a man and a plan.. Harman feels safe and arrogant. We find out

that he bragged to his wife that he was the only one invited to dine with the King and Queen. And she also set a trap.

When the time is right, Hamon will be in the room. And he will not have had time to prepare diddly squat in defense.

At the second banquet, she carefully lays out her argument…respectully. 

She doesn’t say - “You are a pigish bigot for killing all the Jews over a perceived insult.” 

She doesn’t say - “You don’t have to right to kill anyone!” because he did. 

She doesn’t say - “These people didn’t do anything wrong!” because they did sort of. 

She didn’t ask - “Don’t do this!” and embarrass himself to go back on his word. 

Instead, Esther - her name was Esther - knew some critical details that made the situation untenable. She explains the

situation in personal terms because she knows some things that Xerxes does not. 

“Now, Hon, I plan to stay in your good graces…delight in them actually,” fluttering her eyes and turning her head

bashfully. “All I’m askin’ for is to keep breathin’ by your side - pretty please? And don’t turn your back on my

kinfolk, neither. There’s this wicked ole cuss whole done gone and put a price on our heads. Why, he’s aimin’ to

wipe us off the map, scattered to the wind and gone for good. I’m scared, darlin.”

Well, old Xerces didn’t want his sugar-blossom all flustered like that. He asked who would dare to do such a thing to

his Queen or her folks. Esther didn’t drop a second of time and pointed to Haman. “That no-good-snake-in-the-grass

is no one other than that rascal Hamon right here eatin’ at your table.” 

Xerces knew he was about to blow his top. He’d reached for his sword, but thought better of it for a moment and

excused himself to the garden to throw a proper fit away from the ladies. 

Haman - well, he knew he done messed up and knew he’d better be makin up with the Queen. He fell on her couch

bawlin for his life. ‘Bout that time, the king walked back in to see what looked like Haman on the couch a-tryin’ to

kiss and fondle his wife. 

“That snake! Will he molest my Queen while she’s in my own house?”  Xerces remembered the 75 foot gallows

towering over the garden. Harmon had built to kill the Jews. “String him up!” Xerces commanded the guards. 

But Esther knew there was still the problem of the decree. Xerces had signed that decree with his royal ring. And,

he’d accepted a bribe from Haman to compensate for the loss of tax-payin’ citizens. Esther knew slaves would be

tolerable as a loss - but genocide was quite another thing. “Hon, I would have kept my mouth shut and not bothered

you if we’d just been sold as slaves. I couldn’t let you take the fall for bein’ so fiscally stupid with Persia’s money.

How ‘bout you just make a new decree. Give my people the right to protect themselves against Hamon’s trickery.

Our people are strong. We can take care of business.” 

And so he did. Even though Hamon was still a swingin, there was the matter of the law. Plenty of folks across the

127 provinces of Persia were loyal to Hamon, hated Jews, wanted Jewish property, or all three. On the 13th of Adar,

these groups set out to rid Persia of the Jews. 

The Plains Tribune would-a reported it somethin’ like this:

Well now, Haman was already dancin' the henchman’s jig, but his boys and his buddies didn't get the memo. They came lookin' for a scrap on that 13th of Adar, thinkin' they had the law on their side. But "our folks stood their ground and gave 'em a proper thrashin'. We took out 75,000 of 'em across the territory, but they didn't touch a thin dime of their belongin's—we weren't lookin' to get rich, just lookin' to stay alive," reported one of the Jewish soldiers, And just to make sure the message stuck, Queen Esther had 'em hoist Haman’s ten boys up on the poles so the whole town could see what happens when you cross the wrong lady.

Some folks still celebrate that victory at the beginning of March. They call it Purim. They read the stories of Esther.

The audience will

boo and drown out the name of Haman. They send gift baskets of ready to eat stuff - goodies mostly. They make sure

to help at least two people in need that day. They eat and get drunk until they can’t tell the difference between “cursed

by Haman” and “blessed be Mordecai”. Mordecai was the feller that offended Haman in the first place. Also Esther’s

cousin. Kids dress up in costumes and people view plays - political satire. Folks eat triangular stuffed pastries and

call them Haman’s hat, ears, or pockets.

I’ll be sendin’ an invite for Texas-Sized Sweet n Sandy Hamantashen and some punch for Purim. Hell knows we have enough political fodder to rouse up some satire.

I wanna talk for a spell about some things that need sayin’ and other folks can’t. Hit me up if you want an invite.

Since we’ve been talkin' all about that brave Queen Esther, it’s only right we whip up some Hamantaschen—those three-cornered pastries that look just like Haman’s old hat (or his ears, dependin' on who’s tellin' the tale).I need some advisors and help getting thinkin about the most helpful way forward.

Monday, February 23, 2026

The First Meeting

 Once upon a time, Mom took a correspondence class. She never made more than a B or B-. In this lesson, they had her writing beginnings and endings - just like Dr. JAC told us to do when I first took the writing institute. 

She had a notebook of this stuff that dad pulled out of the closet as they are cleaning for the last move. The pages were mixed and crumpled. She's putting them back together and sharing them with me, one by one. 

This one is of our first meeting. I'm celebrating it. But also pre-grieving our last. 

Mom Reading










Thursday, February 19, 2026

What Can You Do with a Miscue: High School Prosody and Literary Analysis Intersect

 

Note: The video is PRIVATE - If you would like to study the video, I'll arrange a private viewing. 

Transcription (I used otter.ai. You should be able to hear the recording.)

Text Source

My markings (if I get time to scan it.) 

Context: 

The teacher selected a learner to provide data for an assessment class she was taking for her Master’s Degree. 

This 11th grade learner works from home. They are NOT a struggling reader or student.

Source/Text

This is the source of the document: https://www.henryanker.com/FluencyMasters.html 

Explanation: 

I've seen a lot of people do a lot of things with Running Records. Even though the SoT says that RR's are not sound SoR practices (Texas Education Agency [TEA], 2020). Call it a miscue analysis then.

And a lot of secondary folks don't realize anything about how to conduct, code, or analyze an oral reading. 

I have goals: 
1. Show what a running record could look like in upper grades.
2. Show that MSV isn't nonsense about guessing. 
3. To show that our work with miscues goes beyond guessing and decoding for fonics - it's about meaning.
4. Show the advanced analysis the reading can reveal about reading behaviors and underlying reader beliefs and processes about reading. 
5. Show how we can use technology and AI to make the process easier.

The Data

I know. It's a lot. There is much to know and learn. And I'm relentless and detailed. Not sorry.

Results: 

So - the data: 

Matteo read at 157 words per minute at 98% accuracy.

Note: The calculation for accuracy didn’t really count all the lexical density and subordination issues as errors. 


Pretty impressive to survive the “icy climes” of 19th century prose with such ease.

There’s no evidence of reading ability issues for much of anything most of us would consider problems. 

The Intervention: 

But how in the world do we help a reader that is THIS good at such a complex text? 

Step One: Establish a purpose for reading. Matteo is reading this in that “I’m-reading-this-aloud-to-read-it” cadence.

They are doing what the teacher asked them to do. I really do think Matteo understands the text from other conversations and interactions with their teacher. Matteo would have benefitted from knowing WHY the teacher wanted them to read aloud.

“Matteo - I’m taking a class where we assess learners to see what we need to do to help them advance

their reading skills. Will you read this as well as you can? Focus on reading to understand what you are

reading. I’ll be asking you some questions about what you read to also test your understanding."


Step Two: Matteo has a pattern of omitting punctuation.Part of this is because this stuff was written in the 1800’s. We don’t talk like that anymore. Part of this is because Matteo is reading to finish. But part of it is because they aren’t used to thinking about how the punctuation is the FIRST place we hear how the author divides up complex ideas beyond subjects, verbs, and compound sentences. Matteo needs support to understand how the punctuation replicates speaking and the musical arc of phrases

inside sentences. 


Step Three: Matteo's fluency doesn't connect/transact with the author or the characters.

Matteo’s purpose doesn’t include decision making about WHO is speaking, WHAT they reveal about

the narrative, or WHY the author shares the ideas in this way.


And this is where prosody, fluency, and literary analysis intersect to bring us deeper comprehension and

transactions with the text and the author (Rosenblatt, 1978).


Here’s a few decisions that need to be made before reading that help determine how we read aloud.

These decisions completely change how the text would sound: 


  • Do we read this aloud as if we were the author, Mary Shelley?
  • To whom would she be reading? To her publisher? Editor? To me?
  • Do we read this aloud as if we were Mrs. Saville’s brother?
  • Is he reading it while writing it? Or sharing with one of his shipmates before sending it on? 
  • Do we read this aloud as if we were Mrs. Saville reading her brother’s letter?
  • How is she feeling and reacting to all of this news? 

Imagine how these three interventions would change Matteo's experience with the text. Imagine what Matteo could do with this kind of cuing support in the Science of Teaching Reading.

References: 

Anker, H. (n.d.). Fluency 68: Frankenstein. Mr. Anker Tests. https://www.henryanker.com/FluencyMasters.html


Google. (2026). Gemini (Feb 19 version) [Large language model]. https://gemini.google.com/

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Southern Illinois University Press.  

Texas Education Agency. (2020). Texas reading academies: Module 2, the science of teaching reading. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/early-childhood-education/reading/texas-reading-academies-hb-3   


Wednesday, February 18, 2026

Online Tests for Reading Level and Instructional Needs

Online Tests for Reading Level and Instructional Needs

An unpopular opinion...about online thingies that tell teachers what their kids' reading levels are and what they need for instruction.

An unpopular opinion...about what STAAR reports tell you about where kids are in their reading level and what they need for instruction.

From my experience and conversations: 

Online reading level screeners - I've NEVER seen one give a valid level. I've seen them spit out a bunch of stuff a kid should know how to do and what they don't. But it's ALWAYS wrong. 

STAAR - even TEA says the assessment results don't tell you a level or what a kid knows. Basically, STAAR tells you how well a kid learned the whole curriculum. And the SST will do the same. Just on more than one day. 

A Real-World Scenario

Let's examine a real world scenario. Anna is in 4th grade. Her school uses IXL. Maybe it uses MAP. Maybe it uses something even more inferior like Star Renaissance. Doesn't matter. 

Kids go to a computer lab. Oh - they don't have those anymore unless there's no library. 

I'll paint another picture. Kids take out their devices. They are in their Reading Language Arts Classroom. Sometimes, all the kids from the whole school are in the cafetori-gymnasi-torium at the same time. All the kids in the class are there. The teacher tells them where to go for the test. Some of the computers work. Others need to be charged. Some of the keys don't work. None of them have mice. Some of the browsers connect. Others don't. 

Then the kids sit there and read everything on the screen and do the best they can while the computer dutifully adapts to what they are clicking on. Kids carefully consider the answer choices and check back into the text to make sure they are right. Other kids finish and get to leave, but they keep on working. Some schools let the kids leave the room. Others make all people stay in place until all are finished with the exam. The kids who are finished read their own books quietly. The kids still testing all sit there and read everything on the screens the best they can. They are not distracted by what others are doing around them. They know they need to do the best they can and everyone is different. 

Nope. None of that happens. That is not the world any of us live in. Never have. 

Human Subjects and Cognitive Actions

So reading. It's all in the head. It's quiet. No one knows what's actually going on - nothing is observable from a process standpoint. And there's nothing really from a product standpoint other than selecting the right answer. But we never really know why that data means what it does until we sit with a kid and talk with them. We never really know WHY that data says what it does because we weren't there  - not in the room where it happened. There are simply too many other variables in setting, individuality, background, emotional maturity, other abilities, what happened in the hall or home before it happened. 

If you are really going to have valid data that tells you WHY a kid can't do a particular standard - you have to understand the reading process in general, the ways kids get it confused, and cause the act of reading to be observable. You have to talk to a kid. You have to hear what they read. You have to analyze the actions and reactions. 

A Chart to Think and Compare

As I was trying to explain the differences in IXL and what we really need to make instructional decisions about kids, I started making this chart with my learner. We brainstormed these ideas.

IXL

IRI

Computer Based

Paper Based

How do they determine the placement level? 

Set of words to read and code; then match to a leveled passage


Cannot capture fluency or accuracy; Collects data about speed and time spent

Fluency and accuracy measured and analyzed

Comprehension questions and TEKS based stuff

Underlying causes

Quick        Time Consuming

Masses

Individuals

Adaptive leveling for future computerized lessons

Diagnostic for theories of reading and approaches to difficulty

Unmonitored

Monitored by an adult; relational

Negatives: Flawed data; Kid thinks they are dumb; learned helplessness; assigned to lessons they don't need

Negatives in practice: Stay in the same level; static group based on the level instead of their actual behaviors and needs; teachers don't know how to use them properly




An Experiment

I'm working with a learner right now who has a lot of STAAR and Reading Level data from a computer. The kid she's working with is in 7th grade. The data tells her that she needs to read at a 4.5 reading level. But I watched her read that IRI (Informal Reading Inventory from a well known source). She's not reading at the 4.5 level. I'll let you know what we discover. 



Banned Words, Head Start, Executive Orders, Court Injunctions

Request: I received a message from a friend about specific words that are banned in relationships to Head Start settings. Here was the instagram post: 

The Trump administration is putting extreme restrictions to Head Start programs, including preventing the use of words like "woman," “disability,” and “race” when applying for grants. We're taking President Trump to court to protect this critical program.


 Was it true? Were these words actually banned? Kinda. Here's the scoop: 

What do the Executive Orders Actually Say? 

There ARE executive orders published in January of 2025 that addressed terminology about gender and diversity. 

Executive Order 14151: I think this is the link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/ 

Executive Order 14168: 

There is another law the language appears with called EO 14173. 

The EO thing does this: Basically - this is the language that the government says that we are supposed to be using the term "sex" and not "gender." The "WE" referenced means people who work for the government. Or get money from them. All federal policies and documents must use the term "sex" in terms of "male" and "female" because they are "immutable biological classifications." 

BOTH EO and 14173 says that no programs can exist that use that kind of language. All language on websites and grants may not use these kinds of words; 

  • "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" 
  • "(DEI)"
  • "Gender and Identity" 
  • "Sex is not a synonym for and does not include the term 'gender identity." 
  • "Equity" and "Equity-related" 
  • "Environmental Justice" 
  • "Marginalized communities" 
  • "Socially disadvantaged" 
Here's where it actually comes from and lives in the documents: 

Section 2(i): Agencies shall terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI, DEIA, and "environmental justice" offices... all "equity action plans," initiatives, or programs.

Section 3(a): Agencies must eradicate the use of "gender identity" and implement regulations, guidance, forms, and communications to comply... [recognizing] the two biological sexes are not interchangeable.

What about the "six page" list of banned terms?

Well. There's a lawsuit: Washington State Association of Head Start et al. v. Kennedy. The Washington State folks were applying for a grant. Allegedly, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent the Washington folks  - and perhaps some other grant applicants - a pdf that asked them to delete particular words to make sure their funding renewal requests could even be processes. 

The court filings from December 5th post this document as their exhibit one.  https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2025/12/Doc-135-1-Dec.-of-Mary-Roe.pdf See item 12 for the specific details and terms they were asked to remove. 

The ACLU added a supplementary record to describe how the list has been used to reject the applications and funding: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2025/12/Doc-136-Mot.-to-Supp-Record.pdf. See page 2 of 10 at the end for specific words. Page 3 continues the list and describes the impact for the next two pages. 

Current Status: 

It's blocked for now. Can't be enforced. 
In the January 7th preliminary injunction, the federal judge told the administration they had to stop asking folks to take these words out of the applications because they are part of the requirements in the Head Start Act. Basically it is a paradox - they have to prove they are following the act in their grant proposals. If they can't use those words, they can't prove their adherence to the criteria. 

Salient Segments of the Act: 

See 42 U.S.C. § 9831 et seq 

1. Language Regarding "Disability" and "Special Needs"

The administration's list flagged "disability" and "special needs," but the Act requires a specific percentage of enrollment be dedicated to these children.   

  • Section 640(d)(1): "The Secretary shall establish policies and procedures to assure that, for fiscal year 2009 and thereafter, not less than 10 percent of the total number of children actually enrolled by each Head Start agency and each delegate agency will be children with disabilities."   

  • 2. Language Regarding "Race," "Ethnicity," and "Diversity"

While "race" and "diversity" were on the list of terms to limit, the Act mandates that programs be "culturally and linguistically appropriate."

  • Section 640(a)(5)(E): Requires the Secretary to "develop and implement a system... to ensure that Head Start programs are culturally and linguistically appropriate" and to account for the "ethnic and racial" diversity of the children served.

3. Language Regarding "Tribal" and "Native American" Populations

The "banned" list included "Tribal" and "Native American," but the Act creates a specific legal designation for these programs.

4. Language Regarding "Pregnant Women" and "Gender"

The administration sought to replace "pregnant women" with "pregnant people" or remove the term entirely; however, the Head Start Act uses "pregnant women" as a specific eligibility category for Early Head Start.

  • Section 645A(c)(2): "Enrolled participants... shall be low-income pregnant women and families with children under age 3."

5. Language Regarding "Trauma" and "Mental Health"

The list sought to limit terms like "trauma-informed," but the Act explicitly requires programs to provide these services.

  • Section 641A(b)(3)(B)(iii): Mandates that performance standards include requirements for "health, mental health, and disability services."

Contact Information: 

The House Committee on Education and the Workforce for the 119th Congress (2025–2026) is the primary legislative body overseeing education and labor policy.

Leadership & Key Contacts

Official Contact Information:

Relevant Subcommittees

The committee operates through specialized subcommittees that handle specific areas of the Head Start Act and workforce regulations:

Current Legislative Focus (2026)

The committee has recently held hearings on the following topics:

  • "Defending Faith and Families Against Government Overreach" (Feb 10, 2026)

  • "Work, Dignity, and Choice in Disability Employment" (Feb 13, 2026)

  • "Examining the Policies and Priorities of the Mine Safety and Health Administration" (Jan 22, 2026)


References: 

American Council on Education. (2025, August 7). President Trump's Executive Orders (EOs) and Actions Impacting Higher Education.

Ballard Spahr LLP. (2026, February 18). DEI Executive Orders Under Fire: Two Major Appellate Court Challenges Spotlight Legal Ambiguity and Uncertainty. JDSupra.

Executive Order 14151: Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (Jan. 20, 2025).

Executive Order 14173: Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025).

Exhibit C to the Declaration of Mary Roe (Doc. 135-1) (Dec. 5, 2025).

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. (2025, January 23). Executive Orders Target DEI Programs and Gender Protections.

Motion to Supplement Record: Doc. 136, describing the list and its impacts (Dec. 5, 2025).

Preliminary Injunction: Issued by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington (Jan. 7, 2026).

The Head Start Act: 42 U.S.C. § 9831 et seq.

The White House. (2025, January 20). Executive Order 14151: Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing.

The White House. (2025, January 21). Executive Order 14173: Ending Illegal