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.

中文翻译：

---

Schwartz 对 Chapman 和 Tunmer 对阅读恢复数据的分析的回应：谁的意识形态和谁的政治？

摘要 在评论我们的论文“参与该计划后两到四年前阅读恢复学生的识字表现：这种干预对早期阅读困难的学生有效吗？”时，施瓦茨认为我们一直致力于追求政治和意识形态议程作为我们对阅读恢复计划的持续攻击的一部分。我们拒绝他的主张，并争辩说，如果我们有意识形态，这与我们致力于使用严格的科学研究来审查支持阅读恢复计划的主张有关。我们还认为，新西兰采用阅读恢复主要是出于政治原因，而不是基于仔细控制的研究。