Phonics instruction is not enough for English Learners, or anyone. But it’s still foundational for all.

by Dr. Claude Goldenberg, Nomellini & Olivier Professor of Education, emeritus, Stanford University

The newest front in the never-ending wars and squabbles over how to teach reading involves English language learners (EL), students learning to read (and write) in English while simultaneously learning to speak and understand it.

In the wake of renewed prominence of research supporting an early focus on phonics and decoding (aka the “science of reading”), EL advocates around the country have been sounding alarms.

For example, a recent EdSource article led with the following: “As California launches a new literacy campaign, some advocates worry that for English learners, a focus on sounding out words will come at the expense of learning the meaning of words.”

In Colorado: “Colorado’s emphasis on phonics in reading could hurt English language learners, advocates say.”

The concern is understandable. Learning to decode words if you don’t understand what they mean seems pointless. In addition, solely focusing on phonics during reading instruction provides a meager literacy diet.

But the concern misses the larger point that learning to read requires integrating written language with oral language. This integration is impossible if you can’t recognize—read—the words on the page accurately and automatically followed by verifying the words’ accuracy.

Word recognition is foundational to reading. Knowing word meanings is important for confirmation. Among skilled readers, the process works automatically, effortlessly, and efficiently. Beginning and early readers need varying degrees of support, scaffolding, and direct teaching to acquire these skills. Some require very little and appear to “catch on” easily; others need a great deal of direct teaching; most are somewhere in between.

This larger point applies to readers in general, not just ELs. I’ll use a metaphor to try to illustrate.

Imagine two roads that begin separately and eventually converge at some desired destination. One road is, let’s say, the “road to the code,” where you learn how the sounds of a spoken language are represented in writing. Progress along this road is relatively straightforward, although it has its challenges. It involves developing phonological awareness, knowledge of letters, letter combinations, and corresponding sounds, and how to use that knowledge to identify written words, often referred to as “phonics” or “decoding.”

I’ll call the other road the “road to understanding.” Here’s where you learn how to make sense of the world as you experience it either directly or through someone’s oral retelling or through electronic media or in written texts. To proceed successfully along this road, you need to learn aspects of language that carry meaning (e.g., vocabulary, morphology, syntax), background knowledge and knowledge of the world, and comprehension and thinking skills and strategies.

Eventually, the roads must converge at their destination: full and competent literacy. The roads start out separately because they proceed in different parts of the brain. Metaphorically, they originate in different geographic locations and traverse distinct landscapes.

Successful travel through the code road in an alphabetic language essentially requires knowing and being able to apply the sound-symbol mapping system of the language’s orthography. Letters are human inventions developed to represent the sounds of speech. There is nothing inherently meaningful about letters, although since their names typically contain the sounds they represent, learning letter names helps connect them to those sounds. The whole idea of learning to read is to make those letters and sounds meaningful by connecting them to meaningful oral language.

Here’s a critical point: Research has shown that the best way to help learners master the road to the code is through direct and explicit instruction in what is sometimes called the “alphabetic principle,” that is, the basic understanding that printed letters represent speech sounds and using that understanding (aka phonics and decoding) to read words. (The issues are somewhat different in nonalphabetic writing systems.)

Mastering the code road is no guarantee of full literacy. Learners must also successfully travel along the path to understanding. This path can be complex and winding. It typically commences even before the road code appears. Explicit teaching contributes to progress along the path to understanding, but so do—perhaps even to a greater extent—direct experiences with the world, interactions with others, and planned and unplanned events and activities.

The path to understanding matters immensely if you are to get to the ultimate destination of literacy. If you can read accurately but without understanding, full literacy is impossible.

Similarly, if you don’t travel well and far on the code road—e.g., someone tells you to take a shortcut by guessing at words—your path to uniting with the road to understanding will be truncated. You won’t get to your destination of full literacy. Why? Because if you don’t successfully traverse the road to the code, your world will be limited to what doesn’t require accurate and fluent reading of written language.

The necessity of traveling along two distinct but ultimately converging paths is as true for English learners as it is for learners who already speak English. This has been amply demonstrated by neurocognitive and neurolinguistic studies involving many different first and second languages and learners around the world.

For English learners or, more generally, students learning to read in a language they are simultaneously learning to speak and understand, there is an important qualification: Care must be taken that words (and text) they are being taught to read are meaningful to them.

We can typically assume that students learning to read in a language they already know already understand words used in beginning and early reading instruction, words such as run, dog, me, and can. We can’t make that assumption with second-language literacy learners. As we take them along the code road, we must also make sure they’re making corresponding progress on the road to understanding the words the code road is helping them learn to read.

This has been well documented in studies by Sharon Vaughn, Linnea Ehri, and their colleagues. These researchers have found that students learning to read in English while gaining English proficiency, but experiencing early reading difficulties, make greater progress when instruction is focused on helping them progress along both roads.

Children were taught the foundations of word recognition directly and explicitly. They were also taught the meaning of the words they were being taught to read and to use those meanings to cross-check what they read using their developing word reading skills.

Note that I’m referring here to English learners learning to read in English. If they are in a bilingual program and learning to read in their home language, learning to read while learning the language is not an issue. While learning to read in your home language might be preferable for any number of reasons, the fact is a large majority of English learners learn to read in English as they are learning English.

The implication is straightforward: English learners need to be helped—taught—to understand the words and text they are being taught to read. But they need to learn, explicitly and directly, the foundations of word recognition to accurately read the words. Both are essential if these students are to become fully, functionally, and successfully literate.

About the author

Claude Goldenberg, Ph.D. is Nomellini & Olivier Professor of Education, emeritus, Stanford University. He is author of Successful school change: Creating settings to improve teaching and learning (Teachers College); co-author with Rhoda Coleman of Promoting academic achievement among English Learners: A guide to the research (Corwin); and co-editor with Aydin Durgunoglu of Language and literacy development in bilingual settings (Guilford). He has published and been on the editorial boards of various literacy and education academic and professional journals. Previous projects focused on improving literacy achievement among English Learners in elementary and middle school, language and literacy development among Mexican children in Mexico, and a randomized control trial of an early literacy intervention in Rwanda. Current projects include consulting for the US Department of Justice on English Learner issues and chairing a research advisory panel on early childhood education for Arizona’s First Things First.

The post Phonics instruction is not enough for English Learners, or anyone. But it’s still foundational for all. appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

An Uncommon Hero: A Tribute to Marion Joseph

A remembrance by Linda Diamond, former president of CORE, Inc.

Almost 28 years ago while I was a senior policy analyst, sitting in my office at RPP International, a California education public policy think tank, I heard a commanding voice berating my boss, Paul Berman, for failing to address the most important policy issue of the time. The woman was Marion Joseph, a California grandmother who saw a serious problem—California’s children were not learning to read. Marion saw this firsthand when she discovered that her beloved grandson struggled to learn to read. He was not alone. California’s reading scores were in the tank, so Marion made it her mission to learn from researchers how reading should be taught. She soon understood that whole language was not the way, and she was determined to do something about it. At that moment, 28 years ago, CORE was born.

Paul Berman, knowing he was out of his depth, asked Marion to meet with me, a former director of Curriculum and Staff Development in the Alameda Unified School District, since I was the only one in the office with actual school experience. Many years before, I had been trained by Siegfried Engelmann in Direct Instruction, so I knew about reading. We spoke for hours, and soon thereafter she returned with Bill Honig, former state schools superintendent, and later Drs. Anne Cunningham and Ruth Nathan, both reading researchers.

Marion’s idea was to launch an organization that would take the known body of reading research, then decades old, into the practice field. Paul Berman agreed to fund us as we developed professional development, and meanwhile Marion met with state policy leaders and continued lobbying anyone in government who would listen. In 1997, former governor Pete Wilson, a Republican, appointed Marion, a lifelong Democrat, to the state board of education. Delaine Eastin, at the time California’s state superintendent of public instruction, convened with Marion’s help a task force to look at reading instruction, and Marion made sure I was on the task force. Marion also made sure that reading researchers she had met with addressed the task force. Consequently, California embarked on a major overhaul of reading instruction.

With Marion spurring CORE on, we set about designing what started as five days of training for elementary school educators. Marion corralled several prominent researchers to help us launch, including Drs. Joe Torgesen, Ed Kame‘enui, Doug Carnine, and Louisa Moats. With Anne Cunningham and Ruth Nathan, protegés of Dr. Keith Stanovich, we created the first professional development series covering phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. I wrote, with Anne and Ruth, much of our first trainings, receiving constant feedback from the experts, and then convinced, with Bill Honig’s help, a few districts to let us try it out. In the early days San Ramon Unified School District, Stockton Unified School District, and Livermore Joint Unified School District were our guinea pigs. By then Sheila Mandel, a clinician from Marin County, had joined our team, and Dr. John Shefelbine, author of SIPPS (Systematic Instruction in Phonological Awareness, Phonics, and Sight Words), joined our training in Livermore.

The response was astonishing. Teachers had not heard of phonemic awareness, and their knowledge of explicit phonics instruction was negligible, but they were eager. Shortly after developing our first training, we hired Dr. Orna Lenchner, who authored the Sounds Abound program and had studied phoneme awareness. Orna developed assessments for us that later went into CORE’s collection of tests, Assessing Reading: Multiple Measures. Joe Torgesen wrote an article for us that was bound into a compendium of research articles, and the CORE Literacy Library began. A few years later, we completed the first edition of the Teaching Reading Sourcebook. During all this time, Marion was a constant presence, calling me frequently to make sure I was staying the course. She urged others to focus on reading, encouraging David Packard Jr. to support the Reading Lions Project, ably led by Alice Furry out of the Sacramento County Office of Education. Though small in stature, Marion’s reach was mighty, long and unwavering, steadfast to the end.

On March 17, 2022, I visited Marion in the assisted-living home she was in, knowing she was not going to be with us much longer, and on March 24, surrounded by her beloved family and after days of calls and visits from the many “Reading Lions” she had nurtured, Marion passed away. No one can replace Marion, but her legacy lives on. When I visited her, Marion said there was more to be done, and I promised her, although I had retired from CORE, that I would keep on working for improved reading instruction. I also assured her that many younger reading warriors were carrying on the work so that all children could learn to read.

A remembrance by Dale Webster, Vice President of Literacy, CORE, Inc.

I first met Marion Joseph 26 years ago when I was working as a Jesse Unruh Fellow in the California State Assembly. This was shortly after Marion and Linda Diamond had participated in the California Task Force on Reading and the task force’s report, Every Child a Reader, was published. During the time on the task force Marion was also schlepping stacks of research articles all over the legislature, lobbying staff and legislators to learn about the research on teaching reading that clearly pointed to the importance of systematic, explicit foundational skills instruction as part of a comprehensive approach to teaching reading. During my legislative fellowship, I was placed with Assemblymember Steve Baldwin, a conservative who was very interested in education issues, particularly reading. Steve was one of several legislators who heeded Marion’s call to action. Together, Marion and Steve formulated a plan to convene an informational hearing in the spring of 1996 to learn where California was in its move toward a balanced, comprehensive approach to teaching reading. As a staff member in Steve’s office, I was assigned to Marion to organize this hearing. Unbeknownst to me, at that moment, I became one of Marion’s “minions” as some of us liked to joke. And that is when my “education” began on what was then referred to as “scientifically based reading research.”

As a recent new teacher, I was aware of my own shortcomings and lack of knowledge about teaching reading and thus began a quest to learn as much as I could . . . a story for another time. Over the three months I worked with Marion putting together this hearing, I learned a lot about the politics of education and what Marion had done in her former career as chief of staff at the California Department of Education and her previous campaign experiences. As part of my experience, I met several reading researchers and was devouring the research that Marion had given me along with many other research articles. As we worked to organize this hearing and after successfully executing it, Marion and I developed a lifelong friendship. After my fellowship in the legislature was over, I went back to San Diego to renew my passion for teaching and to apply and grow my newfound knowledge and experience with teaching reading. Meeting Marion and helping her to organize that informational hearing on reading led me down a path that gave me new purpose in my young life and led me to CORE and to the Reading Lions Center at the Sacramento County Office of Education. I became one of many “soldiers” in a vast army of educators that started small and grew mightily across California and the nation to meet the goal of “every child a reader.” Across the years, I would call and talk to Marion and let her know what was happening in San Diego with reading and would visit Marion at her home. She would cook dinner or we would go out and “talk shop,” lament about politics, or laugh at silly things that we shared in common. Marion was a mentor and a friend. Because of meeting her, my purpose became clear.

A quote by Jeanne Chall, renowned reading researcher and Harvard professor, from her 1990 book, The Reading Crisis, still applies today, 32 years later, and is fitting for what Marion also believed:

“It is common today, as in the past, to look elsewhere than to educational research for an understanding of the literacy problems of low-income children and for ways of solving these problems. Currently, cultural and political theories are offered as reasons for the low achievement of poor children and for the lag between mainstream and at-risk children. Although cultural and political explanations may help us understand the broader picture, in the end they must be translated, in practical terms, into what can be done in schools and in homes. Such translations ought to consider the historical findings of educational research—that good teaching improves achievement and thereby can empower all children and especially those at risk.”

For more information explaining the California Reading Initiative and how Marion spearheaded this effort, please watch this short video.

In loving memory of an uncommon hero and champion for all children . . . good-bye for now.

The post An Uncommon Hero: A Tribute to Marion Joseph appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

CORE Academic Quarterly Newsletter, Winter 2022

Welcome to the Winter 2022 edition of the CORE Academic Quarterly newsletter!

In this edition of the Academic Quarterly, the Reading Expert provides recommendations for Tier 2 reading interventions in a time when universal screening data show that upwards of 80 percent of first- and second-grade students are performing below grade level on foundational literacy skills.

The Marvelous Mathematician shares an excerpt from Kyndall Brown and Pamela Seda’s book, Choosing to See: A Framework for Equity in the Math Classroom.

In the Leadership Corner, you’ll find an overview of the academic and behavior instructional resources available from Vanderbilt University’s IRIS Center.

START READING!

To receive future editions of this newsletter via email, add your name to the mailing list.

The post CORE Academic Quarterly Newsletter, Winter 2022 appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

New Teacher-Focused Program Launched to Drive Literacy Results for Alaska Students

100 AK educators will have the opportunity to strengthen their science of reading instructional practices 

Portland, Ore., Oakland, Calif., Juneau, Alaska – February 3, 2022 – NWEA, CORE® and Alaska Staff Development Network (ASDN),  in partnership with the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), announced today a new learning, collaboration, and coaching program that will empower 100 literacy specialists, instructional coaches, and teachers to enhance their instructional practices, ultimately driving better outcomes for Alaska’s elementary students. The program will utilize federal funds under the Every Student Succeeds Act, Title II and feature CORE’s Online Elementary Reading Academy (OERA), as well as individualized coaching sessions for each participating teacher.

“Better outcomes for Alaska students start with access to teachers utilizing research-grounded, evidence-based instructional practices in the science of reading,” said Jason Mendenhall, President of State Solutions Division at NWEA. “We’re excited to partner with DEED, CORE and ASDN to offer this program to Alaska’s teachers and support their efforts to continuously hone their professional skills in service to their state’s children.”

CORE’s OERA course is a 10-week intensive professional learning experience rooted in the science of reading and focused on accelerating reading achievement. Participants access learning via textbooks, video clips, interactive learning tasks, and webinars and have opportunities to practice skills via weekly online discussion forums, webinars, collaboration activities, self-check exercises, and homework assignments. Instructors will provide support to participants through feedback and dialogue.

“CORE is thrilled to partner with NWEA and Alaska educators to provide our Online Elementary Reading Academy,” said Dale Webster, Vice President of Language & Literacy, at CORE. “We have a long history of partnerships with Alaska school districts and are happy to continue those partnerships to provide high-quality professional learning to improve teaching and learning.”

Beyond the course, NWEA will provide coaching and consultation opportunities for teachers who want to go deeper into the material and individually discuss how to effectively implement the learning into their practice. The not-for-profit organization will also host live events connecting participants with literacy experts to cultivate discussion and community.

Under the coordination of ASDN, which is the professional development arm of the Alaska Council of School Administrators (ACSA), teachers who complete the program will receive a stipend as well as be eligible for continuing education credits through the University of Alaska.

“ASDN looks forward to collaborating with these excellent education organizations to bring innovative professional development and support to Alaskan educators while improving reading and student achievement in our state,” said Lisa Parady, the Executive Director of the Alaska Council of School Administrators (ACSA).

Details about the new program are available at https://dpdol.nwea.org/pl/sa/AK/AK_Literacy_Handout_ProjectFlyer_FY22.pdf

About ASDN

Alaska Staff Development Network (ASDN) is a statewide partnership initiated in 1983 with a mission to improve student achievement by providing researched-based professional development programs for Alaska’s teachers and school administrators. Our offerings expand the professional development opportunities available to all educators across the state. The ASDN is the professional development association of the Alaska Council of School Administrators (ACSA).

Contact: Dr. Lisa Parady – Executive Director, lparady@alaskaacsa.org, (907) 586.9702

About CORE

CORE works with school leaders and teachers to design and implement a customized professional learning plan grounded in (1) the science of reading and (2) best practices in math. CORE offers a combination of workshops, job-embedded professional learning, curriculum implementation, and support so that evidence-based instruction takes root and leads to lasting change.

CORE is a subsidiary of Pivot Learning.

Contact: Clay Willis, Director, Marketing & Communications, cwillis@corelearn.com

About NWEA

NWEA^® (formerly known as Northwest Evaluation Association) is a mission-driven, not-for-profit organization that supports students and educators in more than 146 countries through research, assessment solutions, policy and advocacy services, professional learning and school improvement services that fight for equity, drive classroom impact and push for systemic change in our educational communities. Visit NWEA.org to learn more about how we’re partnering with educators to help all kids learn.

Contact: Simona Beattie, Sr. Manager, Public Relations, simona.beattie@nwea.org or 971.361.9526

 

The post New Teacher-Focused Program Launched to Drive Literacy Results for Alaska Students appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

Seriously, Syntax Matters: Critical Connections to Comprehension

Webinar Date &  Time: Wednesday, February 16, 4:00–5:00 p.m. ET • 1:00–2:00 p.m. PT

REGISTER

Syntax and sentence comprehension are critical yet often forgotten contributors to comprehension. The science tells us that the ability to understand sentence structure, or syntax, is critical to students’ comprehension of written text. The skilled reader has to understand not only the meanings of the words but also the ideas conveyed within and between sentences while integrating background knowledge to infer what is implied in the text. While individual words contribute to the meaning of the ideas, syntax provides the structure for ordering and organizing these idea units within the sentence. It supports the reader’s understanding of who or what did what to whom, when, where, and how within the sentence. An understanding of how the structure of sentences conveys meaning is particularly important as texts increase in complexity through the grades.

During this hour-long webinar, Dr. Nancy Hennessy will discuss:

• The role of syntax and sentence comprehension in extracting and constructing meaning from text
• The challenges presented by the syntax of academic language found in narrative and informational texts
• An informed framework that addresses both intentional and incidental instruction for sentence comprehension

 

Join this discussion to deepen your knowledge of how syntax contributes to meaning and the importance of addressing sentence comprehension in instruction.

If you’re interested but unable to attend the webinar on February 8, please go ahead and register anyway. We will email you a recording to watch at your convenience following the live webinar.

The post Seriously, Syntax Matters: Critical Connections to Comprehension appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

Developing Strong Readers: Proven Practices for Tier 2 Intervention

Webinar Date &  Time: Tuesday, February 8, 4:00–5:00 p.m. ET • 1:00–2:00 p.m. PT

REGISTER

While most elementary age children learn to read well when they receive strong Tier 1 instruction based on the science of reading, every classroom has students who need additional help.

Join Drs. Carrie Thomas Beck, Michelle Hosp, and Monica Ng for this timely webinar to learn practical solutions for providing Tier 2 interventions to students struggling to learn to read. They’ll share:

• An overview of a three-tiered system of support
• How to use diagnostic data to plan Tier 2 interventions
• The components of effective Tier 2 interventions
• Tips for monitoring student progress in Tier 2 interventions

 

Tune into this webinar for insights and strategies to provide targeted Tier 2 interventions that lead to reading success.

If you’re interested but unable to attend the webinar on February 8, please go ahead and register anyway. We will email you a recording to watch at your convenience following the live webinar.

The post Developing Strong Readers: Proven Practices for Tier 2 Intervention appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.

We Still Have Time: How to Support Students’ Reading Skills in 2022

By Dr. Michelle Hosp

We all know it, but we still don’t want to believe it. Many of our students have fallen further and further behind in reading after nearly two years of disrupted learning. A report by McKinsey & Company, “COVID-19 and Education: The Lingering Effects of Unfinished Learning” (July 2021), estimates that on average students started this year four months behind in reading, and for those students in low-income schools, the gap was even wider.

This is a crisis. Our elementary students have missed the opportunity to learn and master critical foundational skills necessary to become successful readers. So what do we do? Here are some thoughts and guiding questions to help shape instruction as we move into 2022:

Data is our friend, not our enemy. Just because we don’t like what the data says doesn’t mean it is wrong or bad. In fact, data is needed now more than ever so we understand where we are and where we need to go.

Are students reaching benchmarks? Universal screening data for reading is vital as it tells us about the reading health of our students. It doesn’t tell us what to teach, we need additional data for this, but it does tell us if our students are reaching benchmarks, meaning they are on track to becoming successful readers. Start by determining the number of students who have reached the winter benchmarks.

What are we looking for in our universal screening data from fall to winter? It is important to track students’ reading growth over time. We want to see more students reaching benchmark and fewer students at risk as we move from beginning to middle to end of year. If we don’t see a bump in our data, we need to ask what we are doing for ALL students (Tier 1):

• Are we focusing on high-priority skills that support decoding and language comprehension (Simple View of Reading, Gough & Tunmer, 1986)?
• Does our teaching follow the Science of Reading? Our instruction should be explicit and systematic, providing students with lots of opportunities to respond with immediate corrective feedback to support their learning.
• Have we incorporated enough practice for students to achieve automaticity and mastery? Students should have access to practice material in and out of school to help them learn critical reading skills to mastery.

 

Tier 1 instruction is the primary solution for addressing missed opportunities to learn and for filling in skill gaps due to disrupted instruction. Within our Tier 1 instruction, we need to incorporate ways to support students both in whole group and during small-group differentiated instruction.

What about our students who are at risk? What can we do for them? Our universal screening data tells us who needs additional help, but we still need to know what specific skills they need help with and how to help them.

Easy? Well, no. It requires time, energy, and thought. As a wise colleague once said, “Thinking is required.”

Reading groups for students who are at risk: What to teach at Tier 2. Some students will require additional reading support beyond what is provided in Tier 1. We need to spend intervention time wisely so that every minute is focused on teaching skills that lead to reading success. Therefore, before we jump into teaching, we should conduct further assessments on foundational skills like phonemic awareness and phonics to determine which specific skills students know and still need to learn.

You wouldn’t want your doctor to perform a procedure on you until she diagnosed what was wrong with you? The same is true when helping students acquire reading skills.

Once we know what to teach, we need to know how to teach it. As we noted above, the Science of Reading informs what our instruction should look like. This is true across tiers of instruction. The science tells us our instruction should be explicit and systematic, providing students with lots of opportunities to respond with immediate corrective feedback to support their learning. More on this below.

 Small-group Tier 2 instruction is often about intensity. Students who are at risk need more focused instruction, and small intervention groups can provide this by including the following instructional features:

• Explicit: Provide additional modeling so students can see, hear, and observe what you are asking of them. This increases their chances of doing it right the first time.
• Systematic: Use the same instructional language and routines and only change the skills being taught. This allows students to have a schema of how the lesson will go so they can focus on the skills being taught. Use a structured scope and sequence that systematically moves from easier to more difficult skills.
• Lots of opportunities to respond: Have students respond multiple times, spaced over time, and using various activities. When learning words, typical learners may need up to 12 practice opportunities, while students at risk may require up to 25 opportunities (Lemoine, Levy, & Hutchison, 1993).
• Immediate feedback: Letting students know they got it wrong right away is more important than letting them know they got it right. Practicing a skill incorrectly makes it harder to learn the correct way.
  • For example, have you ever called people by the wrong name, and they did not correct you until after you said it incorrectly a few times? What happened the next time you went to say their name? I bet you faltered because you first retrieved the incorrect name. To recall the correct name, you now must override your first response and work harder to remember their correct name. This happens every time we let students practice a skill incorrectly! We make it harder for them to learn the correct response.

 

We know reading is hard, it does not come naturally, it’s hard for many students to learn, and it takes hard work on the teacher’s part. The good news is we have universal screening tools to help us identify those students who are at risk and diagnostic tools to help us determine what to teach. We also know if we use our knowledge about the Science of Reading, we can help all students become readers.

Want to learn more about practical solutions for Tier 2? Please join me and my colleagues, Carrie Thomas Beck from CORE, and Monica Ng from Pivot, for a free webinar during which we will provide practical solutions for using data to intensify instruction in Tier 2. Mark your calendars for February 8, 2022 from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. ET and register.

Dr. Michelle Hosp is an Associate Professor of Special Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and a scientific advisor for KeyPhonics. Her research focus is on reading and MTSS/RTI in relation to CBM and CBE. Dr. Hosp has published numerous articles, book chapters, and books related to reading and effective decision making practices and is a member of CORE’s advisory board.

References

Gough, P.B., & Tunmer, W.E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.

Lemoine, H. E., Levy, B. A., & Hutchinson, A. (1993). Increase the naming speed of poor readers: Representations formed across repetitions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55(3), 297-328.

McKinsey and Company., (July, 2021). COVID-19 and education: The lingering effects of unfinished learning. New York: McKinsey & Co.

The post We Still Have Time: How to Support Students’ Reading Skills in 2022 appeared first on Teacher Professional Learning | Literacy, Math | MTSS.