# data[].attributes.body
1-Prealphabetic (sounds)
2-Partial Alphabetic (short vowels, CVC)
3-Full Alphabetic (long vowels)
4-Consolidated Alphabetic (multisyllabic)

# data[].attributes.headline
Why is it so hard to teach reading comprehension?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why is it so hard to teach reading comprehension?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On a scale of 1-10, how good are you at comprehending what people say to you?

It's a bit of a silly question, isn't it? Whether or not we comprehend what we are told is dependent on our grasp of the individual words being used, the concepts to which they relate and how these interact to convey meaning. Talk to me about the first nine seasons of The Simpsons using familiar words and I'll comprehend pretty well. Talk to me about your favourite "anguilliform" Pokemon character and I'll probably stare at you blankly. Yes, there are some basic capacities that underpin our ability to understand what people say aloud, such as our hearing and our working memory capacity. But - on the assumption that these things aren't an impediment - our ability to comprehend what we are told is dependent on what we know about the subject at hand and the words being used to describe it. In other words, there is no generic listening comprehension ability. There is instead a vast network of understanding that determines the extent to which we can construct meaning from the words we hear. Trying to determine - or, heaven forbid, quantify - a person's ability to comprehend what they are told would rely on some way of measuring their grasp of all there is to know about the world and the language used to describe it. How do you measure a person's entire understanding of their world and their language? How do you effectively sample a domain this extensive? Answer: you can't.

And this brings me on to reading comprehension. Our ability to comprehend what we read is reliant on much the same network of understanding that is required for listening comprehension. Let's assume that we can recognise the words on a page fluently enough to free up the cognitive resources necessary for comprehension. Under these circumstances, whether or not we comprehend what we read is dependent on our grasp of the individual words being used, the concepts to which they relate and how these interact to convey meaning. Just as with listening comprehension, this is a domain so vast as to rule out valid assessment. To be clear, what I'm suggesting is that - beyond the development of relatively fluent word recognition* - our ability to comprehend what we read is based on everything we know about our world and our language, alongside an additional layer of knowledge related to written text conventions (e.g. punctuation, sub-headings, italics, etc). How do you measure a person's entire understanding of their world, their language and the conventions of written texts? Answer: you can't.

So, we've established that trying to measure reading comprehension is a non-starter.** From this, we can assume that the results from reading comprehension assessments need to be interpreted very cautiously, especially on the level of the individual pupil.

And this is where this blogpost would end if reading comprehension assessment hadn't warped the teaching of reading. But it has. A lot. For the sake of assessment, teachers have been incentivised to see reading comprehension as a generic skill, or, more precisely, a small set of generic skills. If this perspective were a canvas, it would look something like this:

Here is reading comprehension ability interpreted as a small collection of generic skills, things like retrieval, prediction and summarising. Reading comprehension assessments tend to divide the questions they use into a few categories such as these. Countless teachers and school leaders have thus made the understandable leap that teaching reading comprehension is the process of building up each of these generic comprehension skills. They attempt to add another broad-brushstroke layer to a pupil's prediction skill as a means of filling up the canvas. This conveniently allows for the creation of medium-term plans that state that a given class is working on prediction or inference or some other generic skill. It also allows schools to make lists related to those skills that can be ticked off as children develop. If we're going to gather evidence of a pupil's reading comprehension development, then what we presumably need is a small set of statements that correspond to a relatively small set of generic skills. This interpretation of reading comprehension achieves that.

The problem, of course, is that this interpretation is completely bogus. It is based on a view of reading comprehension that is palpably false. Yes, when we comprehend what we read, we tend to be able to retrieve information, to make predictions, to summarise what we have read, etc, and doing this stuff while we read is a useful set of habits that keeps us awake to what we are doing.*** But this is an unhelpful way to visualise our ability to comprehend what we read. I'd argue that this is better:

Forget for a moment the exact scene being portrayed, and consider the means of portraying it. Here reading comprehension ability is interpreted as a vast interacting network of understanding. It is not built up through broad brushstrokes, but through the painstaking accumulation of knowledge about words, texts and the wider world to which they relate. The natural consequence of such an interpretation is that the teaching of reading comprehension must prioritise the guided exploration of text, involving lots of reading and lots of rich discussion. Retrieval, prediction, summarising, etc will naturally form a part of this, but developing these habits is not the central goal of reading comprehension lessons. The central goal of reading comprehension lessons is to understand the specific text being read and the world to which it relates through exploration of the text's use of language. Everything else is secondary.

However, this interpretation leaves us with some problems. I've lost count of the number of school leaders and teachers who - despite their instinctive enthusiasm for this content-focused conception of reading comprehension - have asked the same two questions:

1. "How would we evidence this?"

2. "What would this look like in terms of our long-term planning?"

I will address these two questions in turn:

The answer to (1) is simple: Don't bother.

I'm serious. Just don't bother. Ofsted have made it abundantly clear that they don't want teachers gathering evidence for its own sake. If your method of assessment requires you to pretend that reading comprehension is something that it clearly is not, then it's time to dump that method of assessment. Think instead about how fluently your children read and how much they know about the English language and the wider world. The former can be assessed by hearing children read aloud and by undertaking quick fluency assessments; the latter, however, is not accessible via reference to simple rubrics. Standardised reading assessments may give a very rough idea, but they are not to be relied upon as precise measures of individual progress for all the reasons explained above. It's time to accept that there are some things that we can measure and other things that we cannot and to change our assessment decisions accordingly.

The answer to (2) is a little more difficult. Think back to the canvas above. To build up a picture like that, many thousands of dots are added across the breadth of the canvas, each chosen partly based on its relationship to the other dots on the canvas. In a content-focused view of teaching reading comprehension, our planning must focus on the content being read - the characters, the themes, the text features, the aspects of the world being described, etc. And it must do so in relation to the rest of that which has been, and will be, added to the canvas. In short, stop focusing on how non-existent generic comprehension skills will be taught. Instead focus on the texts themselves - not least their variety and their relationship to the rest of the curriculum**** - and on how you will ensure that pupils learn lots about them.

A content-focused approach to the teaching of reading comprehension aligns with a more accurate view of reading comprehension. It allows teachers to do away with pointless, time-consuming forms of assessment. It encourages school leaders to re-imagine their reading curriculum primarily in terms of the texts to be shared. Most of all, it offers our pupils a more authentic, enriching and effective experience of reading.

So, what's stopping us from teaching reading comprehension really well? Absolutely nothing.

If you'd like to find out more about teaching reading, please consider my book, The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading: link

All royalties will be going to the Malaria Consortium, a Give-Well-recommended charity.

* Fluent word recognition is also dependent on our broader language comprehension alongside our knowledge of phoneme-grapheme relationships, phonemic skills, etc.

** The Teachwell blog has an excellent series on this idea: http://www.teach-well.com/reforming-the-key-stage-2-reading-sat-why-its-needed-and-possible/

*** There is lots of research into comprehension strategies. This blog is a good place to start if you want to know more: https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/comprehension-skills-or-strategies-is-there-a-difference-and-does-it-matter#sthash.ZC5WlzWX.dpbs

**** This does not mean that every text has to directly relate to something else in your wider curriculum. It might even be the case that texts are chosen precisely because of how they supplement the curriculum. (E.g. If a primary history curriculum doesn't include a study of a South American civilisation, a non-fiction text relating to the Maya civilisation might be an apt choice to add breadth to the pupils' understanding of the challenging - and often controversial - concept of civilisation.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's stopping us from teaching reading comprehension really well?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On a scale of 1-10, how good are you at comprehending what people say to you? It's a bit of a silly question, isn't it? Whether or not we comprehend what we are told is dependent on our grasp of the individual words being used, the concepts to which they relate and how these interact...

# data[].attributes.headline
Science Behind Small Group Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
Science Behind Small Group Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.body
(1 hr) A SUPER interesting video about small groups, independent work, and differentiation--major shifts in thinking here!

# data[].attributes.body
UFLI Passages
The Measured Mom-Fiction  Nonfiction
Core Knowledge Student Readers
Beyond Decodables
Speld Phonic Books
Open Source Phonics (Passages)
Flyleaf Publishing
Starfall

Other decodable books to purchase

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rethinking Instruction in Phonological Awareness: Focus on What Matters!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The importance of phoneme awareness for acquiring the alphabetic principle and for learning to read has been documented since the 1970s, gaining broad recognition when the National Reading Panel Report was published in 2000. Since then, instruction to foster phonological awareness has become routinely recommended for the early grades.

However, the widespread practice in schools is to target awareness of larger phonological structures such as words, syllables, and onset-rimes before focusing on phonemes, with attention to the phoneme not occurring until well into kindergarten or first grade.

During this hour-long webinar, Dr. Susan Brady will examine studies that raise questions regarding whether following this "continuum" is necessary and/or beneficial for students. She also discusses:
- The developmental sequence of phoneme awareness
- The importance of conducting phoneme awareness activities with letter knowledge and handwriting
- The benefits of this approach for all students

Watch this webinar to deepen your understanding of how and when to teach phonemic awareness to set students up for reading success.

# data[].attributes.headline
Cortex in the Classroom: Advancing the Science of Reading in the Early Years

# data[].attributes.subject
Cortex in the Classroom: Advancing the Science of Reading in the Early Years

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Advancing Science of Reading in the Early Years - K–5 Literacy Program & Curriculum | Amplify CKLA

# data[].attributes.headline
The Reading "Wars"--a quick history of teaching reading and the controversies along the way

# data[].attributes.subject
The Reading "Wars"--a quick history of teaching reading and the controversies along the way

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
You Were Probably Taught to Read Wrong | Otherwords

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Use the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines to evaluate how well a curriculum aligns with the findings from the science of reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Teacher Friendly Guide to Reading Research.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Decodable Text Linda Farrell  Michael Hunter Oct 2021

# data[].attributes.body
Screening
Also called a benchmark DIBELS

Diagnostic Tools
Phonics Screener
Dictation/Spelling Screener
Phonological Awareness Screeners

# data[].attributes.body
Certification in Elementary Ed, Special Ed, Bilingual Ed, and TESOL

Migrant Educational Outreach Teacher

Bilingual ICOT (Integrated Co-taught SPED, Spanish/English)

Literacy Coach and Coordinator

Head of Student Support Services

English as a New Language (ENL)

New York/China

Cheese-maker
Traveler
Pun-lover

Email: hannah@erinkentconsulting.com

# data[].attributes.body
More focused on word recognition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sold a Story: How Teaching Kids to Read Went So Wrong

There's an idea about how children learn to read that's held sway in schools for more than a generation - even though it was proven wrong by cognitive scientists decades ago. Teaching methods based on this idea can make it harder for children to learn how to read. In this podcast, host Emily Hanford investigates the influential authors who promote this idea and the company that sells their work. It's an exposé of how educators came to believe in something that isn't true and are now reckoning with the consequences - children harmed, money wasted, an education system upended.

Sixty years ago, Marie Clay developed a way to teach reading she said would help kids who were falling behind. They'd catch up and never need help again. Today, her program remains popular and her theory about how people read is at the root of a lot of reading instruction in schools. But Marie Clay was wrong.
Sold a Story is an independent investigative journalism project from American Public Media. We rely on your donations to support this kind of rigorous reporting.
The controversial educational publishing company has sold instructional materials and professional resources in almost every state, earning at least $1.6 billion over a decade. Explore a map of school districts.

More states are now requiring districts to adopt curriculum that adheres to the science of reading. Look up the policy in your state.

At least 15 states have passed laws about how schools teach reading since the Sold a Story podcast was released in 2022, but there is pushback.

Here's a reading list put together by Emily Hanford.

This discussion guide, created by a teacher, invites educators, parents, community members and kids to have a conversation about the podcast.

Emails and voice messages poured in from people who listened to Sold a Story.

We'll let you know when we release new episodes of the podcast. Enter your address below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sold a Story: How Teaching Kids to Read Went So Wrong

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's an idea about how children learn to read that's held sway in schools for more than a generation - even though it was proven wrong by cognitive scientists decades ago. Teaching methods based on this idea can make it harder for children to learn how to read.

# data[].attributes.body
Epic Book: pg 18-21, 24-25

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Guide for Evaluating K-8 ELA Curriculum

Designed by literacy experts for evaluating K-8 ELA curriculum, the Knowledge Matters Review Tool is a resource to determine if an ELA curriculum is truly "content-rich" and aligned to research on reading comprehension.

About the Knowledge Matters Review Tool

We've developed the Knowledge Matters Review Tool to help educators understand how key research insights and practices should be translated into curriculum design for K-8 ELA. It is intended for use by states, districts, and schools when evaluating ELA curriculum.

The Review Tool is designed to be used in addition to, not instead of, other instruments to ensure that "knowledge building," and by extension reading comprehension, is appropriately addressed.

Our team of experts has identified 26 separate criteria across eight dimensions of high-quality, content-rich ELA curriculum. The more evidence these criteria are present in a curriculum, the better.

Access the review tool

We offer a PDF version for downloading as well as a Google Doc version that can be used when collaborating with colleagues. Both versions can be edited and adapted as needed.

VIEW GOOGLE DOC DOWNLOAD PDF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Knowledge Matters Review Tool - Knowledge Matters Campaign

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Designed by literacy experts for evaluating K-8 ELA curriculum, the Knowledge Matters Review Tool is a resource to determine if an ELA curriculum is truly "content-rich" and aligned to research on reading comprehension. We've developed the Knowledge Matters Review Tool to help educators understand how key research insights and practices should be translated into curriculum design for K-8 ELA.

# data[].attributes.headline
Science of Reading-Reading League Defining Guide: A quick, MUST-read <3

# data[].attributes.subject
Science of Reading-Reading League Defining Guide: A quick, MUST-read <3

# data[].attributes.body
40 pg Presentation--user friendly!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When I was in my second year of teaching Kindergarten, I tried something new.

A few times a week, I started having my students practice writing sounds on whiteboards. For example, I might say the /m/ sound and students would write the letter m.

Eventually, they began writing words - at first, with lots of help from me.

After that, they began writing sentences. (Again, with lots of help at first.)

I noticed that this several-times-weekly practice seemed to be really helpful. It appeared to be improving their letter sound knowledge, their decoding, and their overall phonics knowledge.

A year or two later, I learned that I was not the first teacher to have discovered this practice.

This instructional practice - the one I thought I'd "invented" - had a name. It was called a dictation.

And - good news - it WAS an effective practice!

But the funny thing about a dictation is that it seems SO simple...and yet there are lots of nuances.

So we're going to cover all of this in this post:

What is a dictation?

How do you give a dictation?

How do you support students who need extra help? (Or a challenge?)

Sound Dictation

As I mentioned, I began by having my Kindergarten students write sounds (or rather, the letter for a sound).

But hold on! Even if you teach 1st grade, 2nd grade, or above, you will still want to include sounds on some of your dictations.

For example, you might say the sound /ō/ (long o, as in "oatmeal") - and then your students would need to write all of the following:

You would have them write as many ways as they've learned to spell the sound. So if they only know "o" and "oa," for example, they would only be responsible for writing those two spellings.

Sound dictations aren't just for Kindergarteners! ?

Here are the steps I follow when I do a sound dictation:

Teacher: "The sound is /ch/. Repeat."

Students: "/ch/"

Students write "ch" on their whiteboards / paper.

Teacher: "What says /ch/?"

Students: (pointing to the letters) "C-h says /ch/." (They're naming the letters and giving the sound.)

Teacher writes "ch" on the board and students fix their work if needed. (Note: If you see many students spelling the sound incorrectly, you can do this step before asking "What says /ch/?". Either way, the kids get almost immediate feedback on their work and make changes if needed.)

Notice how I have them repeat the sound before they write it - and after they write it.

Word Dictation

Except for the first few weeks of Kindergarten, I always include individual words in my dictations.

I choose words that have our target phonics patterns PLUS some review patterns from previous weeks. Kids are only asked to spell sounds / patterns that they've already been taught.

(However, they might be asked to spell unfamiliar words, so that I can see if they can apply their sound knowledge to spell a new word.)

This is what it might look like in practice:

Teacher: "The word is flip. Repeat."

Students: "Flip"

Teacher: "She can do a flip on the monkey bars. Let's say the sounds in 'flip.'"

Teacher + Students: /f/ /l/ /ĭ/ /p/

Teacher: "Write 'flip.'"

Students write "flip" on their whiteboards / paper.

Once students are finished, the teacher writes "flip" on the board and students fix their work (if necessary).

You can then do some quick work with the word. For example:

Teacher: "Let's say the sounds in flip and touch the letters as we say them. Ready?"

Students + Teacher: "/f/ /l/ /ĭ/ /p/" (all pointing to each letter as they say the sounds)

Teacher: "What's the blend in this word?"

Students: "F-L"

Teacher: "What's the vowel sound in this word?"

Students: "/ĭ/"

Teacher: "Which letter says /ĭ/?"

Students: "i"

You don't need to go through all that for EVERY word, but I usually do discuss 1-2 of the words in depth in each dictation.

If you're thinking right now, "Well, some (or all) of my kids wouldn't be able to do that" - no worries! I've got you covered!
Ways to Provide More Support with Word Dictation

Tell students each sound in the word. (Like "/f/ /l/ /ĭ/ /p/," in the example above.) Have them repeat the sounds after you finish.

Tell them each sound, one at a time. After you say the sound, students write the corresponding letter(s). (Only do this if students truly need a lot of support.)

Ways to Provide Less Support with Word Dictation

Have students say the sounds in the word without your help.

Don't say the sounds in the word as a group - require students to say the sounds and write the word on their own.

You can provide more (or less) support if needed.

Sentence Dictation

Last but not least, my dictations usually include at least one (sometimes two) sentences.

High frequency words that I've taught

Words with sounds / spelling patterns that I've taught

The sentences only include:

In other words, students are practicing concepts they've already been introduced to (just like the sound and word dictations).

Have students repeat the sentence twice.

For younger students (Kinder and early 1st grade), consider drawing a line for each word to help students space correctly and develop concept of word. As they repeat the sentence a second or third time, they can touch each line as they say each corresponding word.

Keep the sentences shorter for younger students.

Incorporate high frequency words from previous weeks for review.

After you dictate the sentence, write it correctly so students get immediate feedback. Younger students do better with re-writing the entire sentence (as opposed to fixing their mistakes in their original work) - erasing can cause paper tears and other drama.

Use this opportunity to remind students about capitalizing the first letter in the sentence and ending the sentence with a punctuation mark.

Here are some tips for success with the sentence dictation:

Putting It All Together

Many times, I'll dictate sounds, words, AND sentences for students to write. We do this in a 7-10 minute dictation.

If it sounds like a lot to fit into 10 minutes...it is! Earlier in the school year, we don't do very many words. Once students get in the routine, things do move more quickly!

As I mentioned, dictations can be done on whiteboards.

But I also like to do them on paper. In mid-Kindergarten and up, at least one weekly dictation is done on paper like this:

This dictation paper comes from my phonics program, From Sounds to Spelling. The lessons tell you exactly what sounds, words, and sentences to dictate to students - so that you cover your weekly patterns AND review previous patterns.

Notice that there are 2 columns for the sounds and words ("My letters" and "Copied letters;" "My words" and "Copied words"). This gives students a place to write the correct sounds and words after they see the teacher's version. ALL students re-copy, even if they were correct the first time. They leave their original work as-is, so that you can see their mistakes.

You may also have noticed that the "My words" column has sound boxes. These can be used to guide students in writing words. One sound goes in each box. The larger box in #5 is for a digraph, like "ch" or "sh."

Here's another version of a dictation paper. Notice how we aren't practicing sounds during this particular dictation. There are no sound boxes, and there are no individual word lines in the sentence:

As you can see, there are tons of minor variations and adaptations that you can make to the dictation process! It's all about meeting the needs of your students. You want to provide them with enough support so that they can be successful - but not too much support so that the tasks are easy.

Do you use dictations in the classroom? Or do you plan on giving them a try? Let me know in the comments!

And if you need a ready-to-use program to guide you in using dictations and other phonics teaching practices, check out From Sounds to Spelling. The program includes professional development videos to help you understand the "why" behind many phonics concepts - plus ALL the materials you need to teach phonics, phonological awareness, and spelling to Kindergarten, 1st grade, and 2nd grade students.

Happy teaching!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is a Dictation and Why Is It Valuable? - Learning at the Primary Pond

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dictations are amazing for teaching phonics. But what is a dictation? How can it be used with K-2 students?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Grouping with Phases of Word Recognition

# data[].attributes.body
More focused on language and reading comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Natalie Wexler, education journalist and author of "The Knowledge Gap," hosts the inaugural series of our new podcast, Reading Comprehension Revisited.

In six short (~30-minute) episodes, Natalie tackles crucial questions such as, why do students from low-income backgrounds typically score lower on reading tests? Why do improvements in the early grades fade out as students advance to higher levels? And most significantly, why haven't substantial investments in education reform delivered expected results?

The answer lies in a longstanding misunderstanding about reading comprehension itself, and how students learn to make meaning from texts. Over six episodes, you'll learn what research tells us about how children really learn to read, and you'll hear from educators from around the country as they share their experiences of embedding knowledge-building into their literacy instruction, and the powerful effects this change has had on their students.
Episode 1: "Kids were bored to death"
June 28, 2023 - Despite substantial investments in education reform, the US remains in the grip of a decades-long reading crisis. But why? With the help of teachers and researchers, host Natalie Wexler introduces the urgent need to revisit our approach to reading comprehension.
Episode 2: "A simple way of looking at a complex problem"
June 28, 2023 - Thanks to tireless efforts by researchers, advocates, and educators, the importance of systematically teaching decoding is finally being recognized. But, as you'll hear, there's far more to reading than decoding, and more we need to do to help our kids become truly literate.
Episode 3: "That cloud looks like an anvil"
July 5, 2023 - Abby Boruff, Deloris Fowler, and Kyair Butts teach different ages and subjects, in different parts of the country. When their schools adopted knowledge-building curricula they were skeptical, but the dramatic results they saw in their classrooms helped change their minds.
Episode 4: "Now they had something to write about"
July 12, 2023 - It's hard to read about a topic you don't have knowledge about, but it's virtually impossible to write about it. By having students write about content they're learning about, knowledge-building curricula boost both writing ability and learning in general.
Episode 5: "Everything was in silos"
July 19, 2023 - To become fully literate, many students need a curriculum that builds knowledge in a logical, coherent way across grade levels, and only a leader can put that kind of system in place. Meet Brent Conway and Dr. LaTonya Goffney, two leaders who did exactly that.
Episode 6: "Think what a better society we'll have"
July 26, 2023 - American education has a number of serious problems - and our failure to start building kids' knowledge early is a fundamental one. But there are ways to ensure that the growing trend toward knowledge-building curriculum takes root and spreads.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Natalie Wexler, education journalist and author of "The Knowledge Gap," hosts the inaugural series of our new podcast, Reading Comprehension Revisited. In six short (~30-minute) episodes, Natalie tackles crucial questions such as, why do students from low-income backgrounds typically score lower on reading tests?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teaching Strategies: Cognitive Load Theory

# data[].attributes.body
Blank Checklist
Basic Sample
Reading Rope Sample

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading 101: Self-Paced Learning Modules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Core knowledge about reading is a key to effective literacy instruction. Our free, self-paced learning modules can help you deepen your understanding of the building blocks of reading and writing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Languages across the world have unique phonemic systems. For individuals learning English as a second language, it is common for the phonemic system of their first language to influence the production of sounds in English.

Resources listed below are intended to contribute to foundational awareness of potential cultural and linguistic influences. There are variations within cultures, and regional and dialectal variances exist in all languages. Therefore, a single chart/page on cultural and/or linguistic features is not meant to provide a comprehensive overview. Clinical judgment, client/patient/student and caregiver input, and additional research are needed to ensure culturally responsive services.

How Can I Use This Information?

Speech-language pathologists can use this information to:

Identify sounds in a client's phonological system for languages other than English.

Determine phonemic influences of a client's native language on English.

Identify sounds from the client's first language that may not exist in English or identify sounds in English that do not exist in someone's native language.

Recognize that even if there are similar sounds across two languages, they may not be used the same way. For example, in some languages a sound may only be used at the ends of words and not as a word-initial sound.

Audiologists can use this information to:

Correlate the client's audiogram and the sounds of the client's language(s).

Recognize and respond to amplification needs.

Identify the effect of the individual's phonemic system on speech audiometry assessment.

Modify materials and procedures during speech audiometry assessment.

Phonemic Inventories and Cultural and Linguistic Information

ASHA has compiled resources on the phonemic systems for the following languages:

Amharic

Arabic

Bosnian

Burmese

Chinese

English

English Phonemic Inventory [PDF]
Dialect
Haitian Creole

Hindi/Urdu

Hmong

Japanese

Korean

Navajo

Pashto and Persian

Polish

Russian

Spanish

Somali

Somali (Portland State University)

Tagalog

Vietnamese

Refugee Profiles/Information
ASHA's policy documents state that SLPs and audiologists must consider the sound systems of all the languages used by a client in order to provide appropriate assessment and treatment services.
Websites with Phonemic Inventories

If you have any questions, please contact ASHA's Office of Multicultural Affairs at multicultural@asha.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Phonemic Inventories and Cultural and Linguistic Information Across Languages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A list of phonemic inventories across multiple languages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Morphology Project - The Grammar Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2022, three educators and a speech pathologist from Rivergums Primary School, Serpentine Primary School and Fremantle Language Development Centre collaborated on a series of morphology lessons for Grades 3-6. This project is a bank of explicit, direct instruction style PowerPoint lessons that align with the Reading Science in Schools (RSiS) morphology scope and sequence created by Jasmine Shannon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dr. Shanahan: Doing Away with the Instructional Level

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many teachers have already reorganized our leveled libraries because we learned that, according to Fountas and Pinnell, "levels have no place in classroom libraries." Sorting books into bins labeled by theme or topic is time-consuming, but it's not a difficult task. We immediately see that offering students more choice in their reading materials and teaching them to monitor their own reading for accuracy and comprehension is rewarding. However, books at the lower levels, "predictable books," pose a challenge that is not so easily solved.

Problems with Predictable Books

Predictable books are designed to teach children not to depend on decoding to tackle unfamiliar words-they are purpose-written to teach children to predict, or guess words-so what children do with low-level books is not actually reading. Some students climb up the levels by transitioning away from picture-cues and predictable sentences, but others hold tightly to the guessing strategies that are reinforced by predictable books, and time with these books slows their decoding progress. For beginning readers, decodable books provide a more reliable path to authentic texts, and using them for phonics instruction and fluency practice offers a "helps all, harms none" approach to teaching reading. But what, then, should we do with all our predictable books?!

Rethinking the Instructional Purpose

To repurpose predictable books for activities other than reading, we need to look at them with fresh eyes and new criteria. More important than the level stamped on the back cover is the contents inside.

We can ask ourselves, What are the features of this individual book that make it a useful teaching tool? A single book may have more than one useful feature and it might be repurposed for any number of language development, writing, or art activities.

We've listed out some of the features you might look for in predictable books and have drafted example activities to help with lesson planning. (You'll find descriptions and links to the example activities below this table.)

Predictable Book Types

Types

Activities

Examples

Single sentence per page with a single story word
1. (RE)WRITE THE BOOK
Composing Simple Sentences

Cumulative illustrations
8. TALK AND TURN THE PAGE
Language Development for Beginning English-learners

We've drafted ten lesson examples-one for each of the ten book types-to show how predictable books can be repurposed for instruction designed to build students' oral language, writing skills, and creative abilities. The exemplar texts all come from the Green Kit of Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI), but any predictable texts with the similar features would work well. Repeating these lessons with multiple books can deepen students' learning and, if you pull away the scaffolds, many of these activities can become literacy centers.
Click on the activity title to see the lesson example.
Composing Simple Sentences

This activity gives students a purpose for composing grammatical sentences that apply the phonics and high-frequency words they have been taught. Books that have a single sentence per page and that include a "story word" to go with the picture (typical in books Levels A and B) work best for this activity.

Narrative Writing

In some predictable books, the pictures are the most interesting part. A book like, Oh No! (Level A) tells nearly the whole story through the illustrations. Discussing the pictures and creating a story requires students to draw inferences, share observations, and tell/write a story in sequential order.

Writing Speech or Thought Bubbles

The illustrations in predictable texts often communicate the personalities, feelings, and interactions of characters and, to the extent the text tells a story, mirror the story's narrative structure. The pictures provide a built-in scaffold for students as they think about and discuss what characters might be saying (or thinking).

Grammar Instruction

The repetitive sentence structure in predictable books can be used to teach students the parts of speech and how to use those parts to compose increasingly complex sentences (orally and/or in writing). Strategies from Guided Language Acquisition Design (GLAD) benefit language learners of all levels.

Sentence Combining

For this activity, students use paired sentences from a predictable text to generate more complex sentences. Depending on students' language and writing ability, you might choose to do more or less sophisticated sentence combining. The difficulty of the activity can also be varied by determining how much of the writing is completed by the teacher or the students

Writing Conventions

At Level C and above, predictable books tend to have punctuation, like quotation marks and commas, as well as text features, such as bolded words and dialog tags. A big book can provide multiple opportunities to show students the written conventions you would like to see in their writing.

Spelling High-frequency Words

This activity is best suited to irregularly spelled high-frequency words, such as do and one. Students get repeated practice identifying, saying, writing, and correctly spelling high-frequency words in the context of complete, grammatical sentences. Focus this activity on words recently taught during reading instruction so students receive extra practice and learn to spell the words correctly for their own writing.

Language Development for Beginning English-learners

In this activity, students have multiple opportunities to point to images and say what they are. Using sentence frames provides students with repeated practice producing complete, grammatical sentences with the vocabulary they are learning.

Vocabulary Picture Cards

This activity previews or reviews vocabulary related to a topic. As you select words for vocabulary cards, target words that are grade-level appropriate and that will be high-utility in and outside of the classroom.

Labeled Collage

Because so many predictable books are on the same topics (gardens, farms, playing, etc.) it's easy to make book sets. A few books on the same topic, preferably each with a different type of illustration, make great raw material for a collage.

Separator

Onward and Upward!

Predictable books are not the best tool for teaching students how to read, but they can be put to good use in class discussions, ELD or writing lessons, literacy centers, and art. The activities we've shared are just a starting place and we'd love to hear what other ideas you have for using predictable books.

Balanced Literacy instructional change leveled books

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Do I Do with All These Predictable Books?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many teachers have already reorganized our leveled libraries because we learned that, according to Fountas and Pinnell, "levels have no place in classroom libraries." Sorting books into bins labele...

# data[].attributes.headline
How the multilingual brain learns to read

# data[].attributes.subject
How the multilingual brain learns to read

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stanislas Dehaene Summit 2024 Virtual Keynote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I was recently developing some PowerPoints and activities for a comprehension training session about the role that text structure plays in reading comprehension. One of the related topics that is unfamiliar to many teachers was Cohesive Devices (sometimes called Cohesive Ties, and also known as anaphors). I thought I'd devote this post to explaining cohesive ties and how they might affect reading comprehension, especially for younger students or English language learners.

Cohesive devices are words or phrases used to connect ideas between different parts of text. There are three main types of cohesive devices:

Pronouns that refer back to a previously mentioned noun.
Example: Jim went out to the playground. He played on the swings.

Substitution of a synonym for a previously mentioned noun.
Example: There was a lot of food, but she only ate the bread.

Transition words and inter-clausal connectors such as so or because

Example: Jim played on the swings. Later, Jim played ball.

Example: Mary was late, so she took the bus. Mary was late because she took the bus.

Cohesive devices affect comprehension because they help readers integrate information between sentences in a text. The pronoun, synonym, or transition word is tied to a previous word, phrase or clause (the antecedent). Many students, even skilled readers, never consciously think about authors' use of cohesive devices. It is helpful for teachers to draw attention to this kind of text structure, especially for students who have difficulty comprehending a series of sentences that include cohesive ties. Children with poor reading comprehension make more errors on questions that can only be answered if a pronoun has been correctly resolved. They are less likely to supply the appropriate anaphor in a cloze task. For example, "Steve gave his umbrella to Andrea in the park because ___ wanted to keep dry." (Carlisle & Rice, 2002; Cain & Oakhill, 2007) Also, poor comprehenders' difficulties are particularly pronounced when there is intervening text between the anaphor and it's antecedent.
Examples
Look at the two examples below. The cohesive ties are linked to their antecedents with arrows. Notice how there can be multiple cohesive ties within a single paragraph!

Instructional Suggestions
As a means of drawing students' attention to cohesion, have them identify all the words that "stand for" other words, phrases, or a clause in a short, familiar passage from material students are reading. For young children, many of the read aloud texts that teachers use to develop vocabulary and comprehension include examples where the author has used pronouns, synonyms, and transitions to connect sentences. For good readers, an activity such as this may be all that is necessary to encourage greater attention to the connections between sentences. The following are some recommendations for students who have difficulty understanding cohesion (Maria, 1990):

Have students match the cohesive tie with its antecedent. There are several ways to do this. Students may draw arrows from the cohesive ties to the words they replace, write the antecedent above the cohesive tie, or write the same number over words that are linked. Some students may benefit from applying one of these techniques as they read.

Have children read a passage and answer questions that require comprehension of cohesive ties.

Delete pronouns from a passage, and have students fill in the blanks.

Give students a passage in which names and other sentence components have been unnecessarily repeated. Ask them to substitute cohesive ties for the repetitious information.

At times, the antecedent of a pronoun may be somewhat ambiguous. Some children may need to be taught how to use "clues" such as number and gender to figure out what pronouns stand for.
Example: Joe and Laura went to the beach. He played in the water while she looked for shells. Afterwards, they had a picnic lunch.

In other instances, children may need to draw on background knowledge and reasoning skills to determine the most probable antecedent of a pronoun. In the following example, it more likely refers to the mall than to the bank since John was able to conduct his business at the bank: John went to the mall after he deposited some money in his account at the bank. It was closed.

References:

Cain, K. & Oakhill, J. (2007). Reading comprehension difficulties: Correlates, causes, and consequences. In K. Cain & J. Oakhill (Eds.) Children's comprehension problems in oral and written language. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 48-49

Carlisle, J.F. & Rice, M. S. (2002). Improving reading comprehension: Research-based principles and practices. Baltimore, MD: York Press. pp. 129-130

Joan Sedita

Joan Sedita is the founder of Keys to Literacy and author of the Keys to Literacy professional development programs. She is an experienced educator, nationally recognized speaker and teacher trainer. She has worked for over 35 years in the literacy education field and has presented to thousands of teachers and related professionals at schools, colleges, clinics, and professional conferences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are Cohesive Devices and how do they affect comprehension? - Keys to Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I was recently developing some PowerPoints and activities for a comprehension training session about the role that text structure plays in reading comprehension. One of the related topics that is unfamiliar to many teachers was Cohesive Devices (sometimes called Cohesive Ties, and also known as anaphors).

# data[].attributes.headline
Why a knowledge-building reading curriculum?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why a knowledge-building reading curriculum?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America's Broken Education System--and How to Fix it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America's Broken Education System-and How to Fix it [Wexler, Natalie] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America's Broken Education System-and How to Fix it

# data[].attributes.headline
Is it a challenge due to language difference or is there another challenge separate from language?

# data[].attributes.subject
Is it a challenge due to language difference or is there another challenge separate from language?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Determining whether a student's speech and language errors result from influences from their native language or whether they are indicative of speech or language impairment is a challenge many educators face. One in every five children in the United States comes from a home in which English is not the primary language. In this book, we compare and contrast English with 12 other languages and African-American English. The information is laid out in charts and diagrams to facilitate the decision-making process about student needs.

Our goals are to:

Help teachers know when a referral is needed

Equip speech-language pathologists with information they need to accurately analyze speech and language samples

Get students the support they need

Reduce disproportionate referrals of culturally and linguistically diverse students for special education services

The development of this book stemmed from the needs of a group of speech‐language pathologists evaluating the speech and language skills of children from many different linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The framework used to distinguish language differences from language disorders is beneficial for all educators, and the use of this framework will result in improved instructional targets for culturally and linguistically diverse students in the general education classroom, as well as more appropriate referrals for special education evaluations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Difference or Disorder? Understanding Speech and Language Patterns in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rapidly identify speech-language patterns related to second language acquisition to distinguish differences from disorders. 12 languages and AAE included!

# data[].attributes.headline
Foundational skills as a practical guide

# data[].attributes.subject
Foundational skills as a practical guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The newest addition to Scholastic's "Science of Reading" collection is an early literacy handbook written by a teacher for teachers. This book is about decoding and phonics. Lindsey uses her impeccable body of research to create a powerful translational work interpreting reading science. She employs a scaffolded approach to teaching foundational skills, starting with decoding and oral language, moving through phonemic awareness and sound-spelling knowledge, and ending with fluency. Of particular value is the focus on bridging to practice: activities and lessons presented here can be used immediately in the classroom. The book is predicated on the "Essential Instructional Swap" of substituting ineffective activities for more effective, evidence-based routines. For example, "Fewer Rhymes, More Phonemes" and "Less Pointing to Text in Predictable Books, More Engaging in Shared Reading." The depth of research backing this text cannot be overstated. Lindsey refers to the findings of meta-analyses throughout, and the book sports a beefy and current reference section. VERDICT This title can be used as a handbook for professional educators; its clear organization and focused language will be useful for early literacy teachers.-Jennifer Townesα(c) Copyright 2011. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.

" Reading Above the Fray is a wonderful resource, a book I read from cover to cover. The scholarship is impeccable, citing the central and most impactful studies surrounding foundational skills and their importance to reading acquisition. Authored by a passionate educator, the book is rich in stories, lessons, activities, and ideas. It is a joy to read and will become a well-worn guide for teachers and students of reading!"Book Smart: How to , Julia masterfully connects the deep research base on how kids learn to read to what teachers can do tomorrow in their classrooms. What I love even more about the book is her focus on the joy of helping students develop the tools they need to achieve reading success."

- ANNE E. CUNNINGHAM, Professor, Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of California, Berkeley; author of Develop and Support Successful, Motivated Readers Letter Lessons and First Words: Phonics Foundations That Work

"This book speaks to something near and dear to my heart-the power of early literacy to lead to lifelong learning and immeasurable opportunities. With clarity and precision, Dr. Lindsey cuts through the distracting noise around reading instruction. Her book should be required reading in preservice and inservice programs. With it, we can chart a course forward to literacy for all."

- SHARIF EL-MEKKI, Chief Executive Officer, Center for Black Educator Development

"One of the best books I've read on decoding and phonics. With passion for teaching, Dr. Lindsey interprets reading science in ways that are directly transferable to the classroom. Her book is chock full of techniques, activities, and strategies-a veritable 'go-to' resource. This is exactly the kind of translational work the field needs!"

- SUSANNE NOBLES, Chief Academic Officer, ReadWorks

"Accessible, timely, and easy to use, this is a book that needed to be written for teachers, literacy coaches, and school administrators looking to develop efficient and effective literacy instruction. Dr. Lindsey simplifies the complexities of foundational skills instruction, synthesizes research by bridging it to practice, and provides routines that can be implemented the very next day. I predict it will become a primary resource that educators return to time and again."

- REBECCA MILES, Early Literacy Consultant and Coach Coordinator, Berrien Regional Educational Service Agency

"If you think a professional book about decoding and foundational skills can't be engaging, think again! Dr. Lindsey artfully combines wit, wisdom, and classroom realism with evidence-based routines that we can implement immediately. Most important, she centers each chapter on children, calling us to value and build upon the strengths, perspectives, and cultural assets they bring. This book is a win for educators and, by extension, the children and families they serve!"

- ANNIE PETROZZELLI SPEAR, Literacy Specialist, Consultant, and Author

"Elementary teachers have been waiting for this one! Dr. Lindsey explains not only the 'why' behind the essential elements of decoding, but also provides explicit guidance and routines to help any teacher swap out ineffective practices for more effective and efficient research-based ones. She makes it easy to align instruction to reading science
and teach 'above the fray.'"

- KATHARINE NOONAN, English Language Arts Instructional Coach, District of Columbia Public Schools
- HEIDI ANNE MESMER, Professor of Literacy Education, Virginia Tech; author of Reading Above the Fray

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading Above the Fray: Reliable, Research-Based Routines for Developing Decoding Skills (The Science of Reading in Practice)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Julia Lindsey's evidence-backed routines help young readers decode words efficiently so they can spend more energy on comprehending--and enjoying--what they read! You'll find:1. need-to-know essentials of how kids learn to read.2. principles of high-quality foundational skills instruction.3. teac...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teaching children to read is one of the most important tasks in primary education and classroom practice needs to be underpinned by a secure foundation of knowledge. Teachers need to know what reading entails, how children learn to read and how it can be taught effectively.

This book is an essential guide for primary teachers that explores the key technical and practical aspects of how children read with strong links to theory and how to translate this into the classroom. Bite-size chapters offer accessible research-informed ideas across all major key topics including phonics, comprehension, teaching children with reading difficulties and strategies for the classroom.

Key features include:

· Discussions of implications for the classroom

· Questions for further professional discussions

· Retrieval quizzes

· Further reading suggestions

· Glossary of key terms

Christopher Such is a primary school teacher and the author of the education blog Primary Colour. He can be found on Twitter via @Suchmo83.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading (Corwin Ltd)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazon.com: The Art and Science of Teaching Primary Reading (Corwin Ltd): 9781529764161: Such, Christopher: Books

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this no-nonsense guide, primary reading expert and classroom teacher Lindsay Kemeny shares seven ways K-3 teachers can modify what they are currently doing to transform their reading instruction. Each chapter focuses on a critical area of foundational reading-from the most efficient ways to teach phonemic awareness and phonics to the most effective ways to boost comprehension. Kemeny clears up confusing terms and concepts and offers up "do-tomorrow" strategies to help kids acquire reading skills efficiently and successfully transfer those skills to their reading. Readers will find the literacy routines and lessons Kemeny uses every day with her students detailed in the book, along with links to video demonstrations showing how she puts them into practice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Mighty Moves: Research-backed, Classroom-tested Strategies to Ensure K-to-3 Reading Success (Science of Reading in Practice)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this no-nonsense guide, primary reading expert and classroom teacher Lindsay Kemeny shares seven ways K-3 teachers can modify what they are currently doing to transform their reading instruction. Each chapter focuses on a critical area of foundational reading-from the most efficient ways to te...

# data[].attributes.headline
thinkSRSD (a research- and evidence-based writing framework)

# data[].attributes.subject
thinkSRSD (a research- and evidence-based writing framework)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
think SRSD (self-regulated strategy development)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SRSD (Self-regulated strategy development) PD for schools, led by teachers, coaches & school leaders who all saw ELA proficiency gains

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. Elsa Cárdenas-Hagan is a bilingual speech and language pathologist, a certified teacher, dyslexia therapist, certified academic language therapist and a qualified instructor. She is the President of the Valley Speech Language and Learning Center in Brownsville, Texas and works with the Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation and Statistics at the University of Houston. Elsa has spent the last 2 decades working with national research teams designing assessments and interventions for English learners who struggle with learning to read. She has a passion for ensuring that every child in schools across the world has access to a highly qualified educator who can implement effective language and literacy instruction to diverse populations. Elsa has also dedicated her time and expertise to many organizations. She serves as the Chairperson of the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, she is a Past-Vice- Chairperson of the International Dyslexia Association, Past Chairperson of the Texas State Board for Speech Pathology and Audiology and Past Chairperson of the Texas State Dyslexia Advisory Board. She has also served as a board member of the Academic Language Therapy Association, Southwest Regional Education Laboratory and Texas Comprehensive Center at the American Institutes for Research. Elsa has served her local community as Co-Founder of Brownsville READS! She is recognized for her reading reform efforts at the local, state, national and international levels. Elsa has written many scholarly articles, curricular programs, and book chapters related to language and literacy development among English learners. It is her hope that pre-service teachers will have the opportunity to learn evidence-based practices for teaching literacy to all students, including those who are English learners and struggle with learning to read. Elsa has been recognized for her dedication to persons with dyslexia. She is the recipient of the Margaret Byrd Rawson Lifetime Achievement Award by the International Dyslexia Association, the Dr. Luke Waites Award of Service to persons with Dyslexia by the Academic Language Therapy Association and the Champion of Dyslexia Award by the Texas Education Agency.

Dr. Carlson is Associate Research Professor and Associate Director of Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the University of Houston. She has 25 years of experience and expertise in exploratory, evaluative, and randomized controlled trials (RCT) research. She has served as a principal investigator and co-principal investigator on several large-scale program project grants examining the development of language, literacy, and math skills in school-age students and English learners; the mediating effects of effective instruction, teacher knowledge, and professional development programs; and the efficacy of several language and literacy intervention programs.>.

Dr. Cavazos conducts research and provides technical assistance to states and districts. She assists districts and schools in preparing teachers to effectively work with culturally and linguistically diverse learners with and without exceptionalities. Her extensive experience centers on the intersection of culture, language, and disabilities and providing linguistic and academic interventions for English learners and students in special education. Dr. Cavazos holds a Ph.D. in multicultural special education from the University of Texas at Austin.

Dr. Cheesman, who has worked in the field of dyslexia education since 1990, earned credentials as a Qualified Instructor of Academic Language Therapists at Columbia University and is certified as a Dyslexia Therapist by the International Dyslexia Association (IDA). She has presented lectures and workshops throughout the United States, Canada, and Kuwait. An active member of the Global Partners of IDA, Dr. Cheesman received a Fulbright Specialist Grant to develop Institutional Accreditation Standards for dyslexia organizations worldwide.

Dr. Reutebuch holds a doctorate in special education with experience directing large-scale intervention, evaluation, and, professional development projects. She has served as a classroom teacher and reading coach before transitioning into higher education. Her areas of research include reading difficulty/disability in children and youth, including those targeting English learners and individuals with autism.

Ms. Rico is a bilingual educator who works at the Valley Speech Language and Learning Center and Saint Mary's School in Brownsville, Texas. Her expertise includes working with English learners who experience reading difficulties. Most recently, she has specialized in educational technology to incorporate a hybrid model of instruction. She has also served as a co-editor for curriculum designed to meet the language and literacy needs of bilingual students.

Dr. Tridas is the Director of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics at Pediatric Epilepsy & Neurology Specialists. He is Clinical Associate Professor in Pediatrics at the Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida, a member of the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, and Past President of the International Dyslexia Association. He provides consultation services in areas related to child development and behavior, nationally and internationally.

Ms. Lovelace-Gonzalez is an educational diagnostician and a certified Academic Language Therapist with 30 yearsâ€™ experience in public schools. She previously served for 5 years as the state Dyslexia Consultant for Texas. Ms. Lovelace-Gonzalez recently served on the Texas Education Agency Statewide committee for the 2018 update of the State Dyslexia Handbook.

Mr. Nieser is a project manager for the Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the University of Houston. He has more than 30 years of experience in elementary, bilingual education. He has worked on numerous projects that focus on various aspects of early literacy. He has presented at national and local bilingual conferences and is a national trainer for the Tejas LEE (Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., 2010) and Esperanza early reading instruments (Valley Speech Language and Learning Center, 2015).

Dr. Pollard-Durodola is a professor in the Early Childhood, Multilingual, and Special Education Department of the School of Education at the University of Nevada Las Vegas. Her scholarship attends to the prevention/intervention of language and literacy difficulties (Spanish/English) among students at risk of academic difficulties. Central to her scholarship is developing intervention curricula that build on validated instructional design principles, evaluating their impact on the language and reading development of struggling readers, and investigating how to improve the quality of language/literacy practices of teachers and parents of English learners. She is interested in bridging research and practice by examining the feasibility/usability of research-based practices. She has published in peerreviewed journals such as Exceptional Children; Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness; The Elementary School Journal; Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools; and Bilingual Research Journal

Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D., H.E. Hartfelder/Southland Corp. Regents Chair in Human Development and Executive Director, The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, Sanchez Building, 1912 Speedway, Austin, Texas 78712

Sharon Vaughn is the executive director of The Meadows Center, an organized research unit at the University of Texas at Austin. She is the recipient of the American Education Research Association Special Interest Group Distinguished Researcher Award, the International Reading Association Albert J. Harris Award, the University of Texas Distinguished Faculty Award, and the Jeannette E. Fleischner Award for Outstanding Contributions in the Field of Learning Disabilities from the Council for Exceptional Children. She is the author of more than 35 books and 250 research articles. Vaughn is currently the principal investigator on several research grants from the Institute for Education Sciences, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the U.S. Department of Education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Literacy Foundations for English Learners: A Comprehensive Guide to Evidence-Based Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Literacy Foundations for English Learners: A Comprehensive Guide to Evidence-Based Instruction [Cardenas-Hagan Ed.D. CCC/SLP CDT CALT, Elsa, Vaughn Ph.D., Sharon] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Literacy Foundations for English Learners: A Comprehensive Guide to Evidence-Based Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Morpheme Magic – Lessons to Build Morphological Awareness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teachers and students alike, will become captivated by words as they explore together the world of language and morphology, and build awareness of morphemes, the meaningful parts in words.

# data[].attributes.body
Scroll to the bottom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The History and Intent of The Reading League's Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines (CEGs)

Although the scientific evidence base for effective reading has existed for decades, the term "science of reading" has gained traction in the last few years, potentially leading to misunderstandings. As a result, The Reading League convened a group of experts who believed that a common definition would do the following:

support educators as they discern what is and what is not in alignment with the science of reading

assist people in becoming informed consumers of instructional materials, professional development, and resources

impact publishers' and policymakers' decisions as they develop materials and policy guidelines

In working together to clarify a definition, the Science of Reading: Defining Guide was created to provide all stakeholders with a clear understanding of what the science of reading is, what it is not, and much more. The Defining Guide also includes 11 calls to action for all stakeholders. Pertinent to this Curriculum Decision Makers content is the following call to action: " We call on curriculum publishers and professional learning providers to create and promote products that are aligned with the science of reading and to eliminate non-aligned products from their offerings. " Unfortunately, some publishers continue to offer materials and professional development that claim to be aligned with the science of reading but are not.

Many states have mandated the use of high-quality instructional materials to be chosen from lists based on alignment to standards, useability, and often one other feature-outdated practices. Alignment with the science of reading was frequently not included in the development of these lists. While some have identified aligned practices within curricula, none identified non-aligned practices. As a result, many states adopt curricula featuring instructional practices that can inadvertently prevent students from developing proficient reading and writing skills.

To assist curriculum decision makers, The Reading League developed its Curriculum Evaluation Tool, later renamed Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines (CEGs) in 2022. The most recent update of the CEGs (February 2023) places red flag practices front and center in the review process to help decision makers steer clear of curricula featuring them.

Structure and Use of the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines

The practices used to review curricula are those featured in Hollis Scarborough's reading rope metaphor. These are the elements required for word recognition (phonological and phonemic awareness, phonics and phonic decoding) and language comprehension (background knowledge, vocabulary, knowledge of language structures, verbal reasoning, literacy knowledge). The CEGs also review curricula for practices related to fluency, writing (handwriting, spelling, composition), reading comprehension, and assessment.

The Reading League's CEGs are derived directly from scientifically-based research; that they are neither arbitrary nor biased is an incomparable strength of this resource.

When using The Reading League's CEGs, users should carefully examine the following features:

1. Preliminary statements and directions: Recommendations for review teams are provided. Teams should be comprised of educators who have been trained in curriculum-agnostic professional learning to build their knowledge in the science of reading. Decision makers from across tiers of instruction should be included, even if they will not be using the materials, to ensure that students are receiving the same instruction, grounded in the evidence, in general and specialized instruction.

2. Reviewer workbook: This workbook provides space for reviewers to rate the level at which they have found a red flag statement to be true. Reviewers can also note the location and language of the evidence to ensure the review is based on factual evidence and reduce subjectivity.

3. Reference section: An extensive and thorough listing of empirical research and meta-analyses related to each of the aligned and red flag practices in the CEGs is substantiated with a reference from the scientific evidence base.

It is essential to review all components of instruction to ensure your instructional materials provide robust teaching and practice in all components of language and literacy. Empowered with the knowledge of a thorough review, informed educators, coaches, and administrators can leverage this knowledge to ensure their instruction is grounded in evidence.
Stakeholder Uses of The Reading League's CEGs

Schools and districts: CEGs can be used to review existing instructional materials or as a walkthrough tool for instructional practices to ensure teachers are not teaching one component of literacy at the expense of another.

State education agencies: CEGs are useful as a gateway criterion for schools and districts to leverage for curriculum decision-making.

Institutions of higher education: CEGs are an important part of a framework for course syllabi, first teaching students about the research that substantiates each section, followed by deepening student understanding of the red flag practices and aligned practices. Since many schools and districts are shifting to high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) over teacher-created lessons, at the end of the semester, faculty members will ask students to review HQIM using the CEGs to teach them how to be critical consumers of their instructional materials.

Publishers: CEGs can be used to develop and refine content to align with the science of reading. This resource is not recommended, however, to be completed by publishers and distributed to schools and districts for marketing purposes.

Have you used the CEGs in another way? We'd love to hear about it! Email info@thereadingleague.org to let us know.

Using the CEGs to Review Curricula: The Development of The Reading League's Curriculum Navigation Reports

The most common question asked of The Reading League and of many other organizations and social media groups is, "Does my curriculum align with the science of reading?" In 2022, The Reading League developed a process to provide an answer.

Although the CEGs were created to guide teams of curriculum decision makers in the work of evaluating curricula, The Reading League realized that it continued to be intense work. Many consumers lacked the time, resources, or knowledge to be thorough evaluators of instructional materials.

The following are steps taken to formally review curricula:

1. The Reading League launched a pilot review study to develop a non-biased, informational report for some of the most widely used curricula in the United States.

2. Based on this pilot review, small revisions were made to the CEGs and the accompanying workbook.

3. Dr. Matthew Burns conducted an interrater reliability study on the CEGs (see the Interrater Reliability section that follows for more details). The interrater reliability of the CEGs was affirmed.

4. Review teams of three experts were hired and trained.

5. Publishers were contacted and informed that The Reading League wanted to review their curriculum (at no cost). The process was described. If publishers agreed to participate, materials were to be sent directly to the teams. Upon completion of the review, materials were returned to the publishers.

6. Review teams meticulously reviewed all K-5 materials of their assigned curricula. Each person on a team reviewed the programs independently. They then gathered and discussed their findings as a group, and if there were disagreements, a consensus was reached.

7. Data and evidence were gathered and presented to a writer, who drafted them into narrative reports.

8. Reports were then shared with the publishers to ensure nothing was inaccurately represented.

9. Narrative reports were finalized-The Reading League's Curriculum Navigation Reports are born!

The Reading League does not, and will not, recommend particular curricula. Decision makers can trust that these reviews and those involved in the review process, are entirely free from conflicts of interest and financial ties to publishers. The intent of these reports is to provide useful information on some of the most widely-used instructional materials for schools, districts, and states as they work towards building instruction, assessment, and systems aligned to the science of reading.

Interrater Reliability

Dr. Matthew Burns conducted an interrater reliability study of the Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines. This section provides a link to the pre-print of this study along with the abstract.
Reliability and Validity of The Reading League Curriculum Evaluation Guidelines
Abstract: The current study examined the reliability of The Reading League Curriculum-Evaluation Guidelines (CEGs), which were developed to help school-based teams rate the presence of red flags when considering adopting specific literacy curricula. A total of 30 coders (n = 30) independently used the CEGs to evaluate a free online English language arts curriculum. The coders consisted of 23.3% (n = 7) Ph.D. students in special education with previous teaching experience and master's degrees, and 76.7% (n = 23) preservice special education teachers completing their final semester of coursework before beginning their student teaching experiences. The results indicated strong internal consistency (a = 0.96), high interrater reliability (Hmean = .91, 95% CI =.89 to .93, p < .01), and an acceptable estimate of content validity (Vmean = .70, 95% CI =.68 to .72, p < .01). Overall, the CEGs demonstrated acceptable to strong evidence for being a psychometrically sound tool for evaluating reading curricula. The data were sufficiently reliable and resulted in acceptable evidence for content validity.

Publishers: Declining to Participate or Lack of Response

Some publishers declined to provide materials for The Reading League Curriculum Navigation Report review. Those publishers are listed below. The Reading League will continue to reach out to these organizations to request the opportunity to review their programs.
Publishers that declined review or did not respond:

American Reading Company (Declined 2023 and 2024)

Benchmark Education (Declined 2023 and 2024)

Heinemann's Fountas & Pinnell (Did not respond 2023)

Savaas' MyView (Declined 2023 and 2024)

Heinemann's Units of Study (Did not respond 2023)

Critical Considerations: Curriculum Navigation Reports

The Reading League's Curriculum Navigation Reports are the result of years of dedicated work.
To consider before you use the Navigation Reports

1. They are presented to you as informational reports to support decisions on instructional materials.

2. TRL does not recommend curricula, so there is not a mechanism for passing or failing.

3. The first and most important step in aligning a system to the science of reading is to build educator and administrator knowledge. Without professional knowledge about reading instruction related to the science of reading, even the most robust curriculum will not be successful.

4. There is no perfect curriculum.

5. The Curriculum Navigation Reports are intended to help knowledgeable educators understand more about which practices might be avoided, enhanced, or supplemented in instruction and/or determine which curriculum is most suitable for your setting.

To consider as you review the Navigation Reports

1. A Tier I curriculum often consists of an extensive array of materials. A common concern noted by our review teams is that there is insufficient time within the school day to cover all included content. In response to the requests of their consumers, publishers inflate their programs with supplementary materials, add-ons, and extension activities. This makes it challenging and time-consuming to locate necessary or recommended materials for a given lesson across manuals, texts, and digital platforms. Determining what to prioritize or omit due to time constraints can be unclear.
With these points in mind, it is imperative to review the Navigation Reports with a keen eye toward the CEGs.
Address ALL components of the CEGs even if there is no red flag present. For example, if a program did not receive a red flag because it has sufficient writing instruction, be sure to leverage that component of the program! If you take these reports at face value and do not teach and practice each component of the CEGs that was identified, you will be inadvertently creating a red flag of your own by not including it in instruction.

2. Ensure ALL practices are aligned with the science of reading. For example, evidence-aligned word recognition skills are essential but not sufficient. Skilled reading requires word recognition skills and knowledge building, oral language, writing skills, etc.

3. The mere inclusion of a component in the curriculum does not guarantee sufficient practice for successful outcomes. Frequently, the crucial concept of practice (e.g., spaced/distributed, cumulative/interleaved, retrieval practice, corrective feedback) is overlooked in teacher manuals. Therefore, utilizing data to tailor instruction and ensure mastery before progressing is critical.

4. It is crucial to assess the extent to which instructional materials foster and celebrate the cultural and linguistic diversity of students.

5. Note the publication dates of the reviewed curriculum, as the particular edition may feature practices different from the ones featured in these Curriculum Navigation Reports.

The Curriculum Navigation Reports: Coming May 1, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Reading League's Curriculum Navigation Reports offer curriculum decision-makers an unbiased review of curricular alignment with the scientific evidence base.