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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Kristine Mraz (Author), Alison Porcelli (Author), Cheryl Tyler (Author) & 0 more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Purposeful Play: A Teacher’s Guide to Igniting Deep and Joyful Learning Across the Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Purposeful Play: A Teacher’s Guide to Igniting Deep and Joyful Learning Across the Day [Mraz, Kristine, Porcelli, Alison, Tyler, Cheryl] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Purposeful Play: A Teacher’s Guide to Igniting Deep and Joyful Learning Across the Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Empowering educators with tools to positively impact lasting behavioural change in the classroom and support students with ADHD, Autism and other neurodiverse thinkers through inclusion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UFLI Foundations Community: Building Strong Readers | Facebook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This group is for users of the UFLI Foundations program to ask questions, provide ideas and suggestions, and share success stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For years, the most urgent and persistent request we heard from the teachers we work with was for a more effective and more easily implemented program for foundational skills instruction.

While most language arts standards include learning targets for foundational reading skills for kindergarten through second grade, they are not detailed enough to build a day-by-day sequence of instruction. While most schools have an abundance of resources in the form of book rooms, basal readers, and a variety of intervention program kits, there is typically insufficient guidance for how, when, and with whom to use these materials.

In response to this persistent need, our team developed UFLI Foundations, a program that includes the necessary professional learning, resources, and scaffolding for teachers to deliver high-quality instruction in foundational reading skills.

This is how UFLI Foundations was born.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UFLI Foundations | UF Literacy Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For years, the most urgent and persistent request we heard from the teachers we work with was for a more effective and more easily implemented program for foundational skills instruction. While most language arts standards include learning targets for foundational reading skills for kindergarten through second grade, they are not detailed enough to build a day-by-day sequence of instruction.

# data[].attributes.headline
Heart Word videos from Really Great Reading

# data[].attributes.subject
Heart Word videos from Really Great Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Heart Word Magic - Read and Spell High Frequency Words | Really Great Reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Heart Word Magic - Help Students Learn to Read and Spell High-Frequency and Sight WordsHeart Word Magic is a complimentary teaching tool designed to help students learn to read and spell high-frequency words and sight words, particularly those that aren’t very decodable. Show your students the animations, then try these fun, hands-on free Student Practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Instantly access over 40,000 of the best books & videos for kids on Epic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Choosing and Using Decodable Texts: Practical Tips and Strategies for Enhancing Phonics Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amazon.com: Choosing and Using Decodable Texts: Practical Tips and Strategies for Enhancing Phonics Instruction: 9781338714630: Blevins, Wiley: Books

# data[].attributes.headline
"Reading is like breathing in and writing is like breathing out..."

# data[].attributes.subject
"Reading is like breathing in and writing is like breathing out..."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Reading Comprehension Blueprint: Helping Students Make Meaning from Text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Reading Comprehension Blueprint: Helping Students Make Meaning from Text [Hennessy M.Ed., Nancy, Moats Ed.D., Louisa Cook] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Reading Comprehension Blueprint: Helping Students Make Meaning from Text

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Narrator:

Welcome to EDVIEW360.

Dr. Anita Archer:

In other words, keep learning and keep being very sensitive to always looking at what will work, what will make a difference for children.

Narrator:

You just heard from Dr. Anita Archer. Two literacy icons are our guests today on EDVIEW360.

Pam Austin:

This is Pam Austin. Welcome back to the EDVIEW360 podcast series. We're so excited to have you with us today. I'm conducting today's podcast from my native New Orleans, LA. Today, we are excited to welcome two literacy leaders who have impacted the instruction of reading in so many ways. For anyone who teaches reading or follows the science of reading as an approach to helping kids learn to read, you're in for a great experience today as we talk to Dr. Anita Archer and Dr. Louisa Moats.

Let me tell you a little bit about our guests before we begin our conversation. Dr. Anita Archer serves as an educational consultant to state departments and school districts on explicit instruction and literacy. Dr. Archer has won numerous awards and has served on the faculties of three universities, including the University of Washington, University of Oregon, and San Diego State University. She has co-authored numerous curriculum materials, including REWARDS® and REWARDS® Plus literacy intervention programs focused on explicit instruction, and judicious practice to build student literacy competency, and a best-selling textbook, Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching.

Dr. Louisa Moats has been a teacher, psychologist, researcher, graduate school faculty member, and an author of many influential scientific journal articles, books, and policy papers on the topics of reading, spelling, language, and teacher preparation. Dr. Moats has also won numerous awards, and is the author of LANGUAGE! Live®, a blended reading intervention program for grades 5-12, and the lead author of LETRS ®, professional development, and the book Speech to Print: Language Essentials for Teachers. Dr. Moats is also co-author of Spellography, a structured language word-study program.

Oh, welcome. So happy to have you here, Dr. Archer, Dr. Moats. Wonderful to have you here as our guests for EDVIEW360, as we discuss why the science of reading needs the science of teaching. Let's get started. Welcome, Dr. Archer and Dr. Moats.

Dr. Louisa Moats:

Thank you, Pam.

AA:

Hi, Pam. Good to see you. Thanks for inviting us for this conversation.

PA:

All right, very first question. You are both trailblazers in education. What remarkable careers as authors, mentors, speakers, instructors, and more. You've heard that introduction. Let's chat a bit about the early years and what led you both down your respective career paths. Can we start with you, Dr. Archer?

Dr. Anita Archer:

At 76, we have a long path but I'll shorten it to the highlights. It was a wonderful question to be asked, Pamela, because I could reflect back on the 56 years of my career in education. It just seems like it was filled with magical opportunities. I'm a Washingtonian. I grew up in the state of Washington in small communities, seven small communities, and I followed the tradition of my brother and went to University of Washington in the big city of Seattle. During my undergraduate career, I was blessed to be an assistant to very prominent people in reading and instruction, Tom Lovett and Joe Jenkins. I was not even looking at special ed, or looking at education, but I got to do studies with them. When I finished 94-142 had just been passed, and I was given a scholarship and got my master's degree again at University of Washington. Then, I taught at an elementary school and I've taught both general ed and special ed students.

And then, a very sad thing happened, but it was certainly, immediately it changed my career. I was teaching, teaching, teaching, and a professor at University of Washington who taught methods courses in reading died. They called and said, "Would you take it over?" I said, "I'll take it over." I was young. I was very young, 26, and I went off to University of Washington and taught. Later, I went into their doctoral program. And then, another major miracle, my husband at the time was an accountant and an attorney, and he got transferred to Eugene, Oregon. I got to apply to University of Oregon, where I became the head of their reading center and taught methods courses. Now, this was fortuitous, because of all the research that was done on direct instruction, explicit instruction. I got to teach with my colleague, Doug Carnine, and taught from the book he wrote called Direct Instruction Reading.

I actually did the study for my dissertation in Eugene, Oregon, graduated then from University of Washington, and had a great time working at both University of Oregon and then San Diego State. While I was at San Diego State, I taught classes on reading but I taught classes on instruction and taught classes on management and it's all of those things together that paves the way for what I do today, because all of them are necessary. It was just one wonderful, magical opportunity after the next and I got to meet Louisa, in the meantime.

PA:

Right. Miracles and opportunities led to fortunate opportunities for all of the lives that you've impacted, definitely, Dr. Archer. Tell us, Dr. Moats, tell us a little bit about your background, and what led you to do all the wonderful things that we've listed previously.

Dr. Louisa Moats:

Well, I'm glad I heard Anita's story, because first of all, I'm a little older than she is, so I have an even longer, slightly longer path to try to describe in a few words here. But definitely, I would say I was extremely fortunate in many instances not only to be in the right place at the right time, but more than that, I've been extremely fortunate to have people who urged me toward a certain choice or a certain opportunity that I myself might never have taken advantage of. That began when my first boss, who was a neuropsychologist who'd hired me to type the reports, decided to make me into a technician in the neuropsych lab, so I could learn all about the brain and whatever. That sent me off to also a fellowship program in learning disabilities, because he said, "You have to do this," and I was pretty content to just keep going.

And then, one thing sort of led to another. This could be a long story, but I would say that most fortuitously, when I went back to work for him 10 years after that first experience, after trying to be a musician and deciding that wasn't for me, he said, "OK. You're the learning specialist in neuropsychology. Now, you have to get a doctorate because I wrote this job description for someone with a doctorate or at least trying to get one." So, I said, "OK. I will. Harvard's down the street, so I'll see if they will take me." I mean, it was really that thoughtless.

I fortunately was accepted and that experience of really being educated in what I'm known for shaped the rest of my career and that is a deep, passionate interest in language processes as they are not only in play during reading, spelling, writing, and language in the classroom but also as everyone knows, I think, my concomitant interest in how to get teachers and educators and people I work with to understand the same things that I learned about only in my doctoral program. Only fortuitously, that I had Carol Chomsky as a professor, who in the reading department at that time, at the Harvard Ed School was...I think Jean Shaw was the department chair, and Jean Shaw at that time was trying to combat the beginning phases of whole language that were taking over the country and doing a very good job of it except it was a tidal wave too big to push back.

But Carol Chomsky, as the linguist, insisted that anyone in the reading department, masters and doctoral students alike, had to study language. She put us through the wringer and it wasn't easy. A lot of people didn't pass that class. But for me, it was a completely eye-opening experience because up until that time, I had been a lousy teacher. I knew I was a lousy teacher. I knew I was a bit of a charlatan as the specialist in neuropsychology. I was trying to learn stuff from other people but without the real grasp of what was going on in reading processing and in how teaching really was an exercise in enabling kids to build insights about language that would enable them to process the code, to produce the code, and to work with words expressively and receptively in the classroom.

I would have to say, it's so interesting to hear Anita's story, because I feel like the two of us have been in this parallel track with varying expertise. But as time has gone on, I have realized more and more, and I think the last year, for me, was a consolidation of what started out as a dim awareness and now is a very clear understanding of the necessity of marrying the kinds of things that I know about with Anita's incredible expertise in instructional science. Because as I said in the written blog, it's just so clear from data if we really look at what works with kids. Also, it's not only that. I look at what goes on in classrooms with people who get some of what I'm teaching them but they're not using instructional methods and instructional formats and routines with the purpose of accomplishing outcomes. It's not happening. But they think they're doing "the science of reading" if they do this little activity here or that like, "Oh, let's do a sound wall." Well, that's terrific but it needs to be part of a whole, planned, intentional process of accomplishing clear objectives with kids.

Anita and I have come at this from different backgrounds and different pathways but more and more, it's the consolidation, the wedding of both points of view that is necessary to get the outcomes that we want for kids.

AA:

Absolutely. It is the content and it is the instruction that brings the content to the students, so that they can learn it, so it really is a marriage of both.

PA:

Definitely. Oh, thank you so much for sharing your journey of who you were, before you became trailblazers. If I were to sum it up, I was thinking that your life abounded with opportunities, great fortune, as well as mentors, mentors with a capital M, I would say. You were so right. Definitely, your comments segue directly into the next question I wanted to ask you to respond to. Exactly when did you meet each other and when did you understand that impact? Dr. Moats, you started to express that a little bit just now, that impact on each other, the impact that each of you were making on literacy, and learning and teaching. You began that answer, Dr. Moats. Do you want to expound upon that? And then, Dr. Archer, if you can add to that as well, I'd appreciate it.

LM:

Yeah. Well, sure. We were both authors with the old Sopris West, when they hired me basically to write professional development that became LETRS and that was in 2001. I think Anita had already published with them. There was a whole group of authors at the time who had done research, and who had research-based programs, and researched programs that Sopris was publishing.

Mine had just grown out of lots of successive approximations in various settings for the previous 10 years. I became aware of the University of Oregon group and diaspora, the influence of Doug Carnine on many of the people who were writing programs. Many of these people were saying to me, maybe for several years before I actually met Anita at one of the Sopris institutes, I think that was it. They said, "You have to meet Anita Archer. She's just the most amazing teacher, she's just...Well, I mean, there's nobody better. You just have to get to know each other." Finally, I remember there was some back room at a Sopris conference and I met you and I said, "Hello." I thought, "Oh, this is an interesting person."

AA:

So, then after that, conferences. How many times have we been at the same conference, where we have a dinner but always discussions that made us go out and learn more? I mean, we just had a discussion last week that made me spend three days on an answer.

LM:

Great.

AA:

That's exactly what occurred. But one most memorable time was speaking at the same conference in Alaska, during the earthquake, where we bonded in the lobby.

LM:

Yeah. Trying to escape a very noisy, creaky building that was swaying back and forth with a 6.7, whatever it was, earthquake in the middle of the night. Anita said, "Well, I know I've had a nice life. I don't know if we're going to get out of this."

PA:

Well, to keep you going, did the discussion extend to literacy, reading, and instruction?

LM:

Yes. One thing I remember, Anita, every time I talk with you, I get days of follow-up thinking to go through, and there's always a lot of after thinking whenever we talk. One time, we walked around a golf course in California and that was great. But also, when the Common Core was taking hold, you and I had the same reaction. I remember us being in a meeting with people who were talking about the Common Core and implementing the Common Core. Both of us were saying, "Wait. We're just going off track again, forgetting what we know about foundational instruction in reading, in literacy, and especially what we need to be doing with those kids who are not on track, and the importance of teaching people about the instructional process." I remember, I think that was the first time I saw you pretty upset and I thought, "Good. She's upset. I'm upset. OK. I have a compatriot in this fight."

AA:

We have found that again and again, haven't we?

LM:

Yes, we have.

AA:

Where our two paths came together with the same concerns.

LM:

Yeah.

AA:

The same information, yes. It is a combination of those things of the science of reading and the science of teaching, both are needed if we're going to have outcomes.

PA:

Right. Thank you. Our audience would love to hear you both weigh in on the current state of the science of reading in American schools right now, and if it alone is enough. You gave us some little tidbits that would help us understand that maybe not. Is it enough to advance more effective literacy instruction? What are your thoughts, Dr. Moats?

LM:

Well, it's not enough, Pam, if we put it that way. It is very heartening that there is so much interest.

PA:

Yes.

LM:

It's very heartening to me that Emily Hanford's podcast received so much attention. She's being listened to, as she explains a lot of what has gone wrong and what has gone off the rails and why. That's fine. But there's another side to this story and I think Anita and I see it maybe again from slightly differing perspectives but we see the same thing, which is that there is never going to be a pat solution, there's never going to be. It's never going to be simple. It's never going to be as simple as saying, "Oh, we need to inject this component or we need to get back to the 'five pillars' or we need to remind people to be more attentive to using decodable texts," or all these things that come up on the list of things people are supposed to be doing better now.

The issue is that teaching is so difficult and complex. We so underplay what's involved in being an effective teacher. As a society, we are so unfortunately oblivious to or unwilling to elevate the teaching profession to the level of regard and compensation and support that it needs. From both of our angles, from my angle, I really embrace also the angle of instructional science. But the thing I've always written about is that teachers cannot teach these aspects of reading purposefully, and intentionally, unless they themselves have a grasp of the content. It's not as simple as telling them this, that, or the other thing. It's not as simple as handing them a program, although a good program helps a lot, especially for a novice teacher. A novice teacher can learn a lot from systematically applying what is written on the page, if they don't know it, so that's very important for a novice teacher.

But ultimately, there is an interaction between teachers' understanding and their behavior and student outcomes. My thing has been to try to find ways to produce that knowledge and that insight in teachers, and I realize it takes time. You don't do it overnight. The learning process for teachers, which is understudied I think in this area, involves giving people time to grapple with their misconceptions, to grapple with the complexity of our writing system, to grapple with the choices that teachers have to make in the instructional interaction with kids, so that anything that's not scripted on the page, if they're choosing the examples or choosing the feedback, or choosing what task to do next, or judging whether the student has it, all of that comes from an understanding of what's going on with the student, what needs to go on through instruction, what the goals are, and all that. It's not easy.

This is a point I've tried to write about. The Rocket Science paper is an allusion to this but we don't acknowledge in our pre-service training programs, or in the professional development. I mean, I'm hoping LETRS is a departure from what's gone on in the past but we don't acknowledge the complexity of what we're asking people to understand and do. And then, there's the doing part. The doing part and every time I see Anita coach teachers on the doing part, my first thought is always, "Oh, gosh." Every time I watch this, I think, "Could I do this? If I were back in front of a bunch of kids, which I haven't been for a while, how am I going to mess it up, or do a rough approximation of what is called for in a really effective instructional sequence?" It's not easy. We disregard and we undervalue what it takes to build expertise and what it takes to nurture teachers in a nurturing way, not a punitive way, but a nurturing way through that growth process. We have a long way to go with that.

AA:

As I thought about this and one of the things that I did during COVID was I was providing staff development to districts for reading grants that they had. I watched a little more than 200 videos of teachers teaching to give feedback to the teachers and train the principals. I was hit again at just what you talked about is, they had exposure, but not in-depth yet, on the science of reading, and that means decoding, and fluency knowledge, and vocabulary knowledge, and background knowledge, and comprehensive. I mean, think of all of it. I said, "First of all, I think that they need to have very good programs," because I just wrote down what is necessary. It's logically sequenced, it's broken down into obtainable pieces. It has clear goals. It has clarity and demonstration in modeling. It uses both examples and non-examples and moves from demonstration to guided practice to independent practice, and it has deliberate practice, retrieval practice, and space practice. See, a whole body of knowledge.

First of all, both of us have written curriculum materials and we know how much difficulty that is, picking the examples, picking the non-examples, having the routines, having the right language. Oh, my God, it's exhausting. No teacher who has a life after school like dinner and children is going to have time to do what is necessary. I'm hoping that very good curriculum materials come from it, in terms of the design, and in terms of really looking intently at the examples they use and looking at how much practice is necessary, I still am seeing, Louisa, exposure. "Oh, we're supposed to do phonemic awareness in terms of blending, so today, I'll do it."

I made a presentation not too long ago that taught the strategy for reading multisyllabic words that's used in REWARDS. Circle the prefix, circle the suffix, underline the vowels, say the part, say it fast, make it a real word. One person came up afterward and said, "That is such a good strategy. I'll teach it on Monday." I said, "Here's just a little bit of a challenge there, in that we provided 800 words of practice to get the kids to practice, so I don't think you're going to wrap it up on Monday."

It is the design aspects, which for even competent teachers, could be partially handled by very, very good materials, a curriculum, because when you have good curriculum and you have the knowledge that you need about language and everything that you bring to the table and back of it, so that you can make better choices of what you're doing and evaluate it. But if you have a curriculum that's really well-designed, then your cognitive energy can go to the students, to their corrections, or to their errors.

The other half of the coin is delivery and I think that's what you were also alluding at. I see that delivery of content, whether it's in reading or writing or math or science or social studies or health or PE or art or music, it needs to be present starting with attention. In explicit instruction, we talk about a sequence of attention, input, question, response, monitor, feedback, adjust, and that's the rhythm of good teaching. I get their attention; I give them quality input that's unambiguous; I ask for a response; I question; I get a response from them; I give feedback to them. That could be positive feedback of praise, it could be informative, "Here's how to improve upon your performance." It could be corrective and should be if an error occurs and then an adjustment in the lesson. I can go forward, I can't go forward. I have to give more instruction. I have to do this again tomorrow. I need to meet with a small group.

But it is that and I find people who have not taken courses do not have the knowledge at your level of LETRS and of the science of reading, also do not have that knowledge. We have the knowledge. It has to be in a curriculum, so that the teacher has that cognitive support. And then, it needs to have the teaching skills on delivery.

PA:

I just love listening to the both of you talk. We can sum it up with the fact that, yes, reading truly is complex, and often, we like to press the easy button. With reading, we cannot press the easy button. Developing teachers, design, delivery, dedication but dedication to teaching in the manner that's going to ensure that our students gain knowledge in the end, right?

AA:

Well, Pam, I think teachers are dedicated but they're often not dedicated to learning as the outcome and learning has to be constantly. That is how we judge the quality of what we've done. We want to be supportive to children, we want to be equitable to children. We have all of those skills, but in the end, it is the learning that we have to keep our mind on and attend to.

PA:

Thank you so much. Wonderful hearing the two of you discuss this. I'd like to move on and ask you about policy and practice guidelines. The conversation, I think, has really intertwined a lot of the questions that I have, so maybe we can even just extend a little bit more, based on this. Policy and practice guidelines, let's think about that for the science of reading. They often mention the importance of systematic, explicit instruction. We alluded to this already. Yet, why is it the how of teaching reading is getting less emphasis in comparison to the what? You both mentioned already, teachers have some idea of what they're supposed to do, it's that delivery. What's getting in the way of teachers being able to learn that delivery?

LM:

That's a great question, Pam. Anita may be closer to an insightful answer than I. I would speculate that, first of all, it's easier to talk about content, because you can nail it down in a description. We can teach it in LETRS. I mean, LETRS is pretty good for what it does. But what it doesn't do is enable teachers to get enough supervised practice and modeling of how to implement the instructional sequence that Anita just described. We have some videos. They're great. We talk about it, we have lesson frameworks but it's only a step toward the goal and something else needs to happen.

I think it has to do with a lot of different things. One is the willingness of our society to expend resources, building expertise. I think it's this underappreciation across the board of how challenging good teaching is, how challenging it is to develop expertise, what it takes. It may be the tendency of people to grab onto what we call the shiny object in the world of ideas and get distracted by that and get pulled away from the hard work of sticking to the point, which is as Anita said, "Are we getting results? Are we getting the outcomes?" When we get the outcomes, how do we get the outcomes? If my neighbor is getting better outcomes, can I learn from that person or persons? Is there a mechanism within the educational community I'm a part of to help me become more like the more successful teachers without a sense of failure or shame and admitting that I want to be more like the successful teachers?

I mean, there's just so much that seems to get in the way of this approach where there's a community of collaboration where everybody's striving to improve their practice along these lines. It happens in some places, and when it happens, it's magical and wonderful and it's a joyful learning experience for everybody. But that's more the exception. But Anita, I'm sure you have more to say about this.

AA:

Well, so one of your later questions was, "What practices inspire you?" I looked at the states that I have coming up the rest of this year that I'm going to be doing staff development in. Every single one of them has state documents coming out, in regards to teaching of reading, teaching of writing, teaching students with dyslexia. Oregon has documents, Montana, Michigan, Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, Washington, and I'm certain people listening to this their state does too. They will articulate the five pillars, and things that should be taught within them and things that we shouldn't do like three-queuing systems consistently. But they have one line that says, provide systematic explicit instruction. It isn't even articulated in the documents that are meant to carry it out, and so it's like having a medicine without the doctors' orders about how to take it and so we don't get well. Universities don't always have classes on teaching, where you practice teaching, where people observe you, people give you feedback, you watch videos of yourself, you watch videos of your peers. I mean, it's so possible, and powerful.

Louisa, we both got the new (John) Hattie book, Visible Learning, and direct instruction has high effect size of 0.56, which 0.40, above that, we'd say, "Let's do it." Explicit instruction 0.63, mastery learning 0.67, versus discovery learning for new material 0.27. OK. We know so we should be doing this, so we know the details of it too. But that starts at the teacher training level. Do we have courses that teach you how to teach? Do you practice it? Do you take it into practicums? Do you get feedback? Do you watch yourself teach? Do peers watch yourself teach? All of that, which really can make...I mean, when I taught at university, the midterms were, you had to come into a room, get a content, you had 30 minutes to develop it, and you had to teach it. I mean, that was important was how to teach.

All along the way, we are often assuming that teachers know what kind of practices would be useful. But many times, they're even using practices that would be unequitable, that they had used for so many times that they wouldn't even realize it. Like one lesson I watched, this was not in reading, but science, a science teacher who kept saying, "Got it?" 26 times in the lesson, "Got it?" Not asking a question, not validating it, not having them write on a whiteboard, not having them say something to their partner. They all said, "Got it. Mm-hmm." "Got it?" Well, see, he wasn't aware of it. Or a teacher who calls on volunteers. It's still the most common experience that we saw in videos. I ask a question, I open it to volunteers, three children raise their hands, I call on them, they're the highest-performing, most-proficient in English, most assertive students. Or teachers monitor and they walk around but they don't look at students' work. They don't talk to them. They don't give them feedback.

It's like, Ugh. It is in the doing that we need to focus on but the curriculum design for reading is also extraordinarily complex. And then, we have to deliver it in a way and we must because we both agree that reading and writing are absolutely essential. They're civil rights. If you come to this country, you will learn to read and write so that you can go about our society. We cannot not have the power of this.

PA:

I just listened to the both of you and I just have goosebumps. I really do. I am so inspired by your experiences. But just taking away from what you just shared, the content is important but it is not enough. In my mind, trying to organize everything that you just shared, it's application, application, application, right? Model, practice, collaborate, refine that instructional delivery, then do it again. Application, application, application, model, practice, collaborate. Is that a good summation right there?

LM:

One of my favorite sayings that I have to remind myself of, often, is that telling is not teaching. The teacher that was saying, "Got it? Got it?" was telling and not teaching. It is so fundamental and I'm guilty of said mistake over and over. But it helps to at least know when you catch yourself doing it.

AA:

Yeah. Well, right now, this summer I have six weeks that I'm doing week-long trainings on explicit instruction. I said, "You need to add more retrieval practice here." I mean, you feel really guilty when you're teaching it not to do it. But even for me teaching adults, I have to include everything, so that they see it and then they practice it, so that they will do it and it can happen. It definitely can happen, particularly if they have good curriculum materials and we're able to concentrate on the delivery and the equitable delivery. I think that both of us better have a lot of people we're training out there and you certainly do, Dr. Moats. We'll have to increase the amount of training that goes into explicit instruction.

Here's the interesting thing about our careers. My focus was on instruction and I wrote good curriculum materials in reading. Yours was on, "What do we need for reading?" As you've gone in your career, then you've seen, "Ooh, we need to look at instruction to go with it." We need to have teachers with both paths on the same path.

PA:

Well, I was just about to ask, what are your hopes for the future of reading instruction? That's a perfect segue, don't you think?

AA:

Mm-hmm.

PA:

I guess immediate and long-term. Dr. Moats?

LM:

Well, my hope is that this current movement toward the science of reading will not do itself in with overly simplified solutions to the complex problem, which is the history of a lot of good ideas that have come along in education, and that somehow we'll reach some stability and acceptance across the field of what it takes to develop effective teachers and put in the mix enough background knowledge of the thing that we teach, enough modeling and practice, enough ongoing consultation, and collaboration of teachers with each other within an education setting. I don't know if we can do much to change pre-service education but if that actually began in pre-service education that would be a great leap forward as well. But even the best pre-service programs, no, it's not one and done there with your degree marching out the door. It's a long process. I'm still with my colleagues when we do an institute together, we spend a long time figuring out, "Well, what should we do?" It's problem-solving over and over, trying to employ what we know about the how and the what.

AA:

It's basically, "Do we know what to teach?" Even that has been around for such a long time. Fifty years, we've known a lot about the science of reading and we keep getting it expanded upon and clarified as we go forward. For 50 years, we've known the power of direct or explicit instruction, which then is also expanded over time.

What I'm hoping is, first of all, I am really hoping that we will have a significant, intense instruction in teacher training and treat it like a high-level profession that it is that this is the information needed. Just like my good friend who's a surgeon did a lot of studying and then a lot of practice and he told me about the practice that was not done on live human beings, which I appreciated, so that people coming out of teacher training would have more ability to utilize really good curriculum and would recognize when they needed to look at it from the point of view of the science of reading, look at it in terms of the science of teaching, to make a difference. Now, I've seen school districts who have enacted very good staff development and then have teachers go out and utilize it and come together and video themselves and analyze it and analyze it with a coach and analyze it with the peers and the quality of their instruction has gone up. I know it is teachable, usable, and it makes a difference with student learning.

We know what we want to get to but it is not going to happen in one year. It's going to happen over time. But we can't give it up. Remember Reading First. Reading First basically taught critical content, critical instruction, and then boom ended, and people fell back. But I do see more energy from teachers, really, I mean, who've been involved in LETRS, who do podcasts, who do classes online, a significant higher energy around this, Louisa. I think that both of us are, and many other people are lifting up the energy, and the urgency and we must do this. It is what our country must do if we are going to be a functional democracy. We must do it.

LM:

We must do it. I see that too, Anita. I see energy that comes from people who have been through this learning process, and see the results.

AA:

Right.

LM:

See that this path is extremely rewarding and who are energized all over again and then rededicated to teaching and not threatening to leave the profession, thank goodness.

AA:

Right.

LM:

That's what it takes, this feeling of competence, efficacy, collegiality, purpose, certainly not the money in many cases but it's all these other extremely rewarding consequences for becoming effective at helping kids learn.

AA:

It's why they became teachers and it's what's going to maintain them in teaching is I see the success. How many teachers have you worked with and I've worked with who said, "I've taught 22 years in kindergarten. I've never had children who could actually say that. Yeah, doesn't sound out words, right?" I've taught fifth grade forever and I never had children who came in who had the code down, so that we could work on advanced background knowledge and vocabulary. I mean, it definitely can happen and that is what keeps people in our profession. That's what our profession is about. That is what teacher training must be about and staff development and collegiate interactions with the staff. We have had too much my door is closed, no one's coming in, lack of transparency.

We've not had the joy of being humans in the same field talking and learning from each other, which I see doors flying open and staff development occurring, people getting together to discuss specific points, going out and trying it, getting videos, coming back, looking at their peers' videos. I mean, it's coming alive and it feeds the soul of the human beings involved in teaching and administration and the children and their parents.

LM:

Amen to all of that.

PA:

Amen. Your comments surrounding teacher learning and instructional refinement is something that never ends and it is always focused on that, the student outcomes.

AA:

Right.

PA:

This is wonderful. From listening to you also, I am getting the gist of the science of teaching should be getting the same, or in some cases, even more attention as the science of reading. Your thoughts on that?

AA:

Here's a reason more. Well, not more. I don't believe that, because the science of reading is very complex and so much to it. But it's not just the science of teaching and design and delivery of instruction needed for reading. How about math? How about science? How about social studies? How about PE? How about art? How about music? Because the goal is very effective teaching, you got it. One day, I taught a lesson on algebra, and it was on the order of operations, and afterwards the teacher said, "Oh, my goodness, they got it." That is the purpose of teaching. That is what teaching is about. It is a body of knowledge that carries over into other situations. I do believe that we need to have more serious attention to management research also because there's disruptions in classrooms that take students' attention away from looking at the letter and hearing the sound, so it's a number of bodies of knowledge.

PA:

Let's add another layer of focus and talk about the importance of structured language teaching, especially for kids who are struggling with an emphasis on language. Oral language is so important and language in general as we're teaching. What can you say about that?

AA:

I'm turning it over to Louisa because she is queen of language.

LM:

Well, in a nutshell, it means that the content of what we teach explicitly enables kids to understand, be aware of process, rapidly and accurately process different layers of language that are all represented in print, and that all are involved in comprehension. It just means that we explicitly teach what the speech sounds are, we explicitly teach how they're represented in our alphabetic writing system, we explicitly teach what the morphemes or meaningful parts are. We explicitly teach the relationship between what's a syllable and what's a morpheme because they're a little different. We explicitly teach how a sentence works and how to write one and if you are reading a difficult sentence, what to do to find the nucleus of meaning in that and on into paragraph structure and text structure. The other element not only is the what but it's also the continuous process. I think this is embedded in everything Anita teaches and models, the process of exchange between what the teacher says and what the students say back, or to each other, or chorally or however it's going to be done.

That structured language teaching means that the language used is overt, observable, it's modeled, it's responded to, and it's a constant verbal exchange. It's not quiet, it's not so low. It's not supposed to go on covertly inside the kid's head that these connections are to be made. It's auditory verbal exchange with whatever kinesthetics you want to put in the mix.

AA:

Basically, the foundation of reading and writing is language because it is language?

LM:

Yes, it is language. It is not visual imprinting, right? I think this is a key idea in the science of reading that reading is not primarily visual it's linguistic in nature, and so there are many implications to that statement.

PA:

OK. Thank you so much. That was a great deal and so well said. Looking back on your careers, thus far, thankfully, there's much more here for both of you. What do you wish you could tell your earlier selves? Dr. Moats, you go first.

LM:

Gee, that's a hard one. I don't like to think about my earlier self that much. I think I would have said to myself the process of continuous learning is extremely rewarding and I should always choose opportunities that offer that possibility of collaboration with colleagues, learning from mentors, making the most of those opportunities. Because I think as a younger person, I was not fully aware of how important that is, how important going through all of this in partnership, or as a student, either in partnership with colleagues or as a student of people who know more, and who are more experienced is, as we come up in the field, I would've liked being more aware of that.

PA:

Thank you. Dr. Archer.

AA:

What would've you told the 30-year-old Anita Archer, 46 years ago, as she was headed to teach at University of Oregon? "Stay the course, stay the course, stay the course." Now, the reason why I said that was that I had already been exposed to a body of knowledge on very explicit instruction. I'd already been exposed to a body of researchers that were looking into the decoding aspects, the vocabulary aspects, and so forth. I said to my younger self, "Now, more knowledge will be added and you must continuously learn. You must." I have to tell you, I'm certain this is true with Louisa, that now I read more books, listen to more podcasts, spend more of my day learning than I ever did at 30. But I said to the younger person, "Stay the course," which was extraordinarily wise because later I went to Southern California, San Diego, and whole language was totally being birthed and fed.

I just said to myself, "Remember, stay the course." Use what we know because in the United States we have often gotten off course and gotten onto other things that sound good but that they don't deliver what children really, really, really need, and we have to be careful. We have to constantly be asking ourselves this. One of the things I'm doing now this summer is I'm speaking at Mount St. Joseph's University to their 60 doctoral students and saying, "What do you do when you don't have an answer? Well, first you try to find research that directly answers that question. But sometimes that's not possible. So, then, what do you do? You look at the task that you are interested in and analyze the task and what's necessary for the task. If that is not enough, then you look at research that might inform but has not been directly done on that. But we have to, in other words, keep learning and keep being very sensitive to always looking at what will work, what will make a difference for children."

PA:

All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Archer and Dr. Moats. It's been a pleasure speaking with you. It's been inspiring and I know I speak for educators everywhere when I say we thank you for your contributions to literacy learning. Please tell our listeners how they can learn more about you. Do you both have a website that you can direct our listeners to? Dr. Archer then Dr. Moats, please share.

AA:

Mine's easy, www.explicitinstruction.org with videos that you're welcome to utilize in your own trainings. Louisa, I just want to share something. So, I had a file on Louisa Moats, and Louisa, these are all of the presentations you've made over many years to Reading Rockets. There I said to myself, now, I have all your books, your book two, and all your articles but it's not hard to find Louisa Moats online. But they were in a nice big folder, so I read them this week before we met.

LM:

Yeah. Oh, Anita, I hope you weren't bored.

AA:

Wasn't bored once.

All right. But it shows the complexity because every one of those was on an issue like high-frequency words, morphographs that you should teach the meanings of. It just really illustrated that this is not a one and done. This is not exposed and not teach deeply that the complexity is great.

LM:

For her. Well, yeah, I do that. Thank you. My website is www.louisamoats.com. On there, I have a lot of the presentations and articles, and a few articles by other people that I think are really helpful and important, that I've had permission to post. There we go, so that's it. Anita's videos are fabulous. If anyone has not checked those out, they're just wonderful and it's a great service that she made those and posted them. Thank you.

AA:

Thank you, Louisa. You have totally changed reading in the United States and you are deeply honored.

LM:

Well, you too, Anita. I have the greatest respect for you and everything that you have done and continue to do. It's wonderful.

PA:

Just listening to your conversation, it's obvious that you have a vast amount of respect for each other. It's just so appreciative to be able to hear that you all share your thoughts and ideas.

LM:

We really do. I have such deep respect for Anita and Anita is so kind. It's also, we didn't talk about this so much, but Anita's soul, her spirit, her kindness are legendary, and I think it's transmitted in everything that she does. That's the intangible thing that also makes her such a revered teacher of others.

PA:

I'd like to say thank you from all educators everywhere. We appreciate both of you, Dr. Archer, Dr. Moats. This is Pam Austin, bringing the best thought leaders in education directly to you. Please join us next month for another great EDVIEW360 podcast.

Narrator:

This has been an EDVIEW360 podcast. For additional thought-provoking discussions, sign up for our blog, webinar, and podcast series at voyagersopris.com/edview360. If you enjoyed the show, we'd love a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts and to help other people like you find our show. Thank you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why the 'Science of Reading' Needs the 'The Science of Teaching'-A Conversation Between 2 Literacy Leaders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The "science of reading" refers to a vast body of multidisciplinary research providing a rationale for what must be taught to ensure almost all students can learn to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the Brain Learns to Read - Prof. Stanislas Dehaene

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In recent years, scientists have made great strides in understanding how children learn to read, as well as how to prevent and correct most reading difficulties. However, the American Federation for Teachers, the Journal of Learning Disabilities, and School Psychology Review have all highlighted the fact that these findings have not become widely known or used in our schools. Equipped for Reading Success is designed to summarize these research results in a clear and easy-to-read manner, bringing teachers up-to-date on these exciting findings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Equipped for Reading Success A Comprehensive, Step-By-Step Program for Developing Phonemic Awareness and Fluent Word Recognition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In recent years, scientists have made great strides in understanding how children learn to read, as well as how to prevent and correct most reading difficulties. However, the American Federation for Teachers, the Journal of Learning Disabilities, and School Psychology Review have all highlighted ...

# data[].attributes.body
UFLI
CKLA--Free to download (Amplify is the for-purchase version)
Fundations + Geodes readers (Wit & Wisdom is the language comprehension component that can be added on)

# data[].attributes.body
w/ Anita Archer--see her book here

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We provide free reports that help you evaluate instructional materials because high-quality content matters to teachers, to kids, and to our collective future.

Select a subject to browse reports

Student Learning

Rigorous college and career-ready standards can improve and deepen student learning. What is taught matters.

High Expectations for All

Not all students have the same access to high-quality instructional materials and this perpetuates the opportunity gap.

Equity

When teachers are provided with high-quality materials and aligned professional learning, this increases the opportunity for all students to learn and grow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We provide free reports that help you evaluate instructional materials because high-quality content matters to teachers, to kids, and to our collective future. Select a subject to browse reports Student Learning Rigorous college and career-ready standards can improve and deepen student learning. What is taught matters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Teacher’s Guide to Vocabulary Development Across the Day

# data[].attributes.body
Plus a workbook to help guide the process here!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your writing lesson was well-modeled, clear, and engaging, but your students were still at a loss when it came time to write independently. Why? There's a good chance your kids needed more time in the "We-Do" phase of the gradual release model. In this book, Leah shows you how to maximize practice and coaching to better prepare students to write meaningfully on their own. Through the use of uncomplicated structures and systems, she walks you through choosing the right level of support for various teacher goals and student needs. You will get guidance on how to: Identify the components of effective writing, Use specific writing techniques or "sessions" in your daily planning, Differentiate strategies by grade level and student development, Improve classroom collaboration, and Build flexibility when responding to students in the moment. Some great writers are born, but many more are made. Allow We-Do Writing to help you nurture young writers by providing them with the skills and confidence to soar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"We-Do" Writing | Maximizing Practice to Develop Independent Writers | Professional Development Book for Educators | Grade Level K-5

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your writing lesson was well-modeled, clear, and engaging, but your students were still at a loss when it came time to write independently. Why? There's a good chance your kids needed more time in the "We-Do" phase of the gradual release model. In this book, Leah shows you how to maximize practic...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction
A Very Brief Introduction to Principles, Research, and Theory, and How to Use This Book
The idea for a book of writing strategies exists many times over. This one is possible only because of the great books that have come before it. There are books suggesting writing strategies meant for professional writers and college students, such as those by Noah Lukeman, Roy Peter Clark, and Janet Burroway, among others. There are countless examples of excellent compilations of writing strategies in books written for teachers of writing, such as Fletcher and Portalupi's Craft Lessons Series, Barry Lane's After "The End" (1993), Carl Anderson's Strategic Writing Conferences series (2008-2009), Donald Graves' many books, Katie Wood Ray's Wondrous Words (1999) and other titles, Katherine Bomer's books, Georgia Heard's books, Nancie Atwell's In the Middle (2014) and other resources, Lucy Calkins' Units of Study series, and many more. My aim in this book is to offer my favorite, most useful collection of strategies that span all aspects of the writing process, all genres and modes of writing, and that will work well with students in grades K-8. I want to offer you a little bit of everything. I streamlined the language and examples, and I present the strategies in a format that is organized so that the busy teacher can find just the right strategy at just the right moment. Of course, you'll elaborate on the streamlined language and make it your own.

But wait-before you dive in, I'm so glad you're taking the time to spend a few moments with this "Getting Started" introduction. In this introduction, you'll gain a helpful overview of the thinking that undergirds this book's ideas as well as an overview of its organization. You'll learn about strategies and all the aspects that I chose to include to elaborate on them-mentor texts, prompts, lesson language, teaching tips, and more. You'll learn how to navigate the pages of the book so you can find what you're looking for quickly and easily, for this is not a read-every-single-page kind of book (unless you want it to be). You'll get a quick crash course on some important terminology and concepts that will help you use this book to its fullest- thoughts about writing as a process, and modes and genres of writing, for example. And finally, you'll learn how to adapt what's in the book to fit your students' writing time in the classroom, no matter what form that time takes.
Click here to download more of the introduction of this book.
Goal 1: Composing with Pictures

Strategy Go back to your picture(s). Point to the part or picture that teaches something important about your topic. Touch or turn to the next part. Tell what new fact about your topic this part of the picture or this page teaches.

Lesson Language If I wrote or drew to teach, then when I read my writing back I'm going to make it sound like a teaching book. I'm going to tell my reader the facts I wrote about. Let me show you. I drew a picture of a big T. rex. I know a lot about them so I added a lot of details in my picture. I'm going to touch one part and teach what that part says. "The T. rex had very large jaws with big sharp teeth." Now I'm going to touch a new part and teach what that part says. "The T. rex had very short arms. It would only run using its hind legs."

Goal 2: Engagement - Independence, Increasing Volume, and Developing a Writing Identity

Strategy First, identify the problem you're having. Then, check the spot in the room, a resource, or a friend that might help you solve the problem. Try a solution. If it doesn't work, try something else.

Teaching Tip This strategy, like "Use the Room" that appears earlier in this chapter, assumes that there are things in the room that can be helpful, and that you've taught children how to use them. For example, in a primary classroom a word wall may help a writer to spell high-frequency words. If you've introduced and used mentor texts, then having these available for children to reference on their own could help them. Sometimes the problem might be that they need to work in a new spot in the room because of the amount of distractions at their current spot. Brainstorm possible problems with your students, and come up with a list of resources and solutions. Or, this strategy can be like a culmination of past teaching from this and other chapters.

Goal 3: Generating and Collecting Ideas

Strategy Decide on a new place to visit. Go there with no more than a notebook and a set of listening ears and observing eyes. Let yourself pick up on conversation and details of the person. Jot down what you observe, and also what you imagine, about the people you see.

Teaching Tip This strategy will take you outside of the classroom, so it would work well as a whole-class lesson followed by a field trip, or as a suggestion to a student, group, or class for independent writing outside of the school day.

Goal 4: Focus/Meaning

Strategy Think about a memory and all the events that are part of that memory. Think about what's important about that memory, or the big idea the memory leaves you with. Identify the one part of the memory that feels the most important. Write some ideas about what's important about it, and why it's important. Try to write just that one smaller part of the larger moment. Tell it bit by bit.

Teaching Tip The amount a writer will be able to reflect on the overall significance of a small moment will depend on her maturity level and experience with writing. For younger children, you may want to suggest choosing a small moment that will make a good story, rather than one imbued with a deep or heavy significance, or simply encourage them to narrow down the window of time

Goal 5: Organization and Structure

Strategy Before beginning to draft, visualize the shape of what you're going to make. Create some sort of quick visual, in pictures or in words, to represent the overarching structure. As you write, check back to see where you are in your plan.

Teaching Tip This is going to be most helpful after students have learned a variety of ways to structure their pieces and have been introduced to a variety of graphic organizers that would help them to organize, or shape, the information into a structure.

Goal 6: Elaboration

Strategy Think about the subtopics for which you'll want to collect information. Write each of your subtopics as a heading on a notebook or booklet page. As you find new information for your topic, think, "What page in my notebook should this go on? Which subtopic does it provide details for?"

Lesson Language I just found this interesting fact: Ballerinas really wear out their shoes. Many go through as many as 2-3 pairs per week! I'm going to look across the pages of my booklet to see where this would best fit. Would it belong in the section called "Types of Ballet Positions?" No, that's not about the positions. Would it go in the section called "Famous Ballets?" No. "What Ballerinas Wear?" Well, I do talk about pointe shoes in this section, so it might be cool to add this fact about how many pairs of pointe shoes the average ballerina needs. I'll keep the fact here.

Goal 7: Word Choice

Strategy Find all the action verbs in your piece. Focus on any that you think aren't as clear, precise, or exact as they could be. List several options for what might replace that word (use a thesaurus if you need it!). Choose the word that best matches your meaning.

Teaching Tip For this strategy to work, children will need to understand what an action verb is, so identification of verbs is a first step in this strategy. Many teachers weave in some instruction during other balanced literacy components such as word study, read-aloud, and/or shared reading. You could also plan to teach direct minilessons to the class or small groups for those who do not understand parts of speech.

Goal 8: Conventions - Spelling and Letter Formation

Strategy When trying to spell a word, try to visualize where you've seen it written and how you've seen it written before. It may help to close your eyes. Then, in a margin or on a piece of scrap paper, write how you think it's spelled. Try it a second or maybe even third way. Look back at what you've written and ask yourself, "Which of these tries looks right to me?"

Prompts

Check off the parts that look right to you.

Write the word as you think you've seen it before.

Which parts look right? Which part looks off?

Do you think there are some letters missing?

What part of that word is tricky for you?

The part you're trying to spell is also in the word _______. Does that help?

Goal 9: Conventions - Grammar and Punctuation

Strategy Find two sentences that talk about the same topic. Think about the relationship between those sentences. Choose a connector word and try combining the sentences into one. Reread and decide if you like the combined way or original way better.

Lesson Language Here's one spot in my draft where I have two sentences that I
think go well together. I wrote: "A dog is something that can keep you company. A dog
can cheer you up." What's the relationship between those two sentences? They both have
to do with something that is positive about owning a dog, so I think they are related. I'm
adding more information on. I'll try using and to combine those sentences: "A dog can
keep you company and cheer you up." Here's another spot: "I would love to have a dog.
My mom won't let me have a dog." What's the relationship between those two sentences?
The second sentence gives more information that feels in contrast to the first. I'll combine
them with however: "I would like to have a dog, however my mom won't let me." The
new sentence I made seems clearer and more to the point.

Goal 10: Collaborating with Writing Partners and Clubs

Strategy Talk with your partner about your goals (for the writing period, for the week, and/or for writing work to take place at home, and so on). Discuss together how you might get that work done. Write the goal, and make the promise...then check in with your partner soon.

Teaching Tip Reflect on your own life and goals you've set out to accomplish. Now think about how successful you've been and whether or not you made your goals public ahead of time. I know that when I share my goals with my partner, my friends, my colleagues, my editor, I am more likely to get things done. The built-in accountability, the opportunity to celebrate together, the lifeline of support in case something does not go according to plan-these are invaluable.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whether you use Writing Workshop, 6+1 Traits, Daily 5’s “Work on Writing,” a scripted writing program, the writing exercises in your

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your Research-based Guide to Developing Skilled Readers. 300+ strategies with learning progressions support 13 reading goals, with each strategy cross-linked to skills, teacher tips, prompts, research, and reading levels-everything from fluency to literary analysis.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Teacher's Guide to Getting Started with Beginning Writers

# data[].attributes.subject
A Teacher's Guide to Getting Started with Beginning Writers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why Make Books?

What Writers Need to Get Started

Time

Space

Blank Books

Writing Tools

An Image of Bookmaking

Learning Through Language, Learning About Language

Beliefs Guide Actions
Day 1: INVITE CHILDREN TO GET STARTED
Helping Children Understand Time That's Governed by Purpose

The Difference Between Writing as Process and Writing as Procedure

Questions to Help Children Think About People Who Make Books

Picturing Writers at Work

Planting Seeds of Teaching as you Share Children's Finished Books

Deciding Who Will Share at the End of Writing Workshop

Telling Stories of Process

Big Ideas and Teaching Possibilities
Day 2: NAME CHILDREN'S ACTIONS AS PROCESS
Questions That Believe Children Into Being

Understanding What it Means to Be Finished

Three Key Reading Strategies for Beginning Writers

Valuing Children's Long, Slow Work on a Book

Recognizing Children's Actions as Writing Process

Big Ideas and Teaching Possibilities
DAY 3: SET EXPECTATIONS FOR PICTURES AND WORDS
Positioning Children So They're Willing to Try Writing Words

Narrating Your Actions to Show Children How Written Language Works

Composing with Words Involves a Lot More Than Just Spelling

Embedding Teaching Points in Your Authentic Talk with Children

Embedding Big Ideas About Texts

Embedding Big Ideas About Process

Embedding Big Ideas About What it Means to Be a Writer

Resisting the Urge to Overteach

Maintaining Children's Confidence Once They Start Writing Words

A Problem with Dictation

Big Ideas and Teaching Possibilities
DAY 4: OFFER CHILDREN STRATEGIES FOR WORD MAKING
The Typical Range of Word-Making Development

Expanding the Definition of Reading (To Make Sense of Beginning Writing)

The Usefulness of Alphabet Charts

Strategies for Word Making

The Importance of Noticing and Naming - And What to Notice

Why Young Children Need to Talk During Writing Workshop

Editing Possibilities for Beginning Writers

Big Ideas and Teaching Possibilities
DAY 5: SHOW CHILDREN HOW TO MANAGE BOOK MAKING OVER TIME
What Happens When Writers Reread

Pictures First or Words First?

Deciding When a Book is Finished

Teaching Children to Read Their Books

Learning About the Writing Process in the Context of Illustrations

Typical Development as Children Learn to Keep Their Meanings Consistent

Big Ideas and Teaching Possibilities
DAYS AFTER: SUPPORT CHILDREN IN THE EARLY WEEKS OF SCHOOL
Sharing Finished bOoks

Encouraging Fearless Spelling

Embracing Different Writers' Processes

Illustrating with Intention

Managing Ongoing Work

Celebrating Growth Over Time

When the Camera Shuts Off

--

Bookshelf and Other Citations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Teacher's Guide to Getting Started with Beginning Writers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Teacher's Guide to Getting Started with Beginning Writers will help you establish a routine for writing in your classroom and help your youngest students

# data[].attributes.body
UFLI
CKLA
LETRS
The Measured Mom

# data[].attributes.headline
Word Study Small Group Example- (-ed, fluency)

# data[].attributes.subject
Word Study Small Group Example- (-ed, fluency)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Word Study Focused Small Group - Example 2

# data[].attributes.headline
Explicit Phonics lesson template from Shifting the Balance by Burkins and Yates

# data[].attributes.subject
Explicit Phonics lesson template from Shifting the Balance by Burkins and Yates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Phonics Lesson Framework - Updated 4-04-22.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2022, a group of teachers and school leaders from 17 different primary schools across Australia participated in The Syntax Project, facilitated by Stephanie Le Lievre from Serpentine Primary School (WA).

Teachers were accepted into the project if they had experience with an explicit-instruction model and could demonstrate an understanding/experience with syntax level instruction.

All Lesson objectives were allocated to individuals based on experience/expertise and the grade they were currently teaching.

All lessons submitted went through a review process by one of our project moderators:

All lessons were created in teachers' own time. They are being shared freely to encourage professional collaboration amongst teachers and schools.

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2022, a group of teachers and school leaders from 17 different primary schools across Australia participated in The Syntax Project, facilitated by Stephanie Le Lievre from Serpentine Primary School (WA). Teachers were accepted into the project if they had experience with an explicit-instruction model and could demonstrate an understanding/experience with syntax level instruction.

# data[].attributes.headline
Letter Lessons & First Words Example and Planning Template

# data[].attributes.subject
Letter Lessons & First Words Example and Planning Template

# data[].attributes.headline
Replicable Process for Responsive Literacy Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
Replicable Process for Responsive Literacy Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kindergarten and First Grade Student Center Activities Phonological Awareness | Phonics | Fluency | Vocabulary | Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SAMPLE Phonics Weekly Lesson Plan: short vowels + blends

# data[].attributes.headline
Reading Strategy Group Example- Vocabulary

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading Strategy Group Example- Vocabulary

# data[].attributes.headline
TIP: Think flexibly about instructional time (samples with and without workshop framework)

# data[].attributes.subject
TIP: Think flexibly about instructional time (samples with and without workshop framework)

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For each of these seven must haves, Wiley shares lessons, routines, word lists, tips for ELL and advanced learners, and advice on pitfalls to avoid regarding pacing, decodable texts, transition time, and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Fresh Look at Phonics, Grades K-2: Common Causes of Failure and 7 Ingredients for Success (Corwin Literacy)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Fresh Look at Phonics, Grades K-2: Common Causes of Failure and 7 Ingredients for Success (Corwin Literacy)

# data[].attributes.headline
Shared Reading Example- Language Comprehension focus linked to science content

# data[].attributes.subject
Shared Reading Example- Language Comprehension focus linked to science content

# data[].attributes.headline
Writing Strategy Group Example- Punctuation

# data[].attributes.subject
Writing Strategy Group Example- Punctuation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From 2004 to 2010, a team of researchers and teachers at FCRR collected ideas and created Student Center Activities for use in pre-kindergarten through fifth grade classrooms. The activities are designed for students to practice, demonstrate, and extend their learning of what has already been taught, sometimes with teacher assistance and sometimes independently. Students can complete the activities in small groups, pairs, or individually.

Accompanying these Student Center Activities is a Teacher Resource Guide that offers important insights on differentiated instruction and how to use the Student Center materials.

Component

Name of the reading component: Phonological Awareness (PA), Phonics (P), Fluency (F), Vocabulary (V), or Comprehension (C). Each component is color coded: PA is purple, P is orange, F is red, V is green, C is blue.

Subcomponent

Name of the reading subcomponent, which is a subskill of the component.

Activity Name

Activity Number

The letters correspond with the reading component (PA, P, F, V, or C). The numbers are listed in ascending order within each component. The activities are sequenced from simple to more complex within each component and subcomponent.

Student Icon

The suggested number of students for the activity. One student icon indicates that students may work independently or with a small group. Two student icons indicate that the activity requires students to work in pairs. Two student icons with a plus sign indicate that the activity requires two or more students.

Objective

States the goal of the activity, which is aligned with the subcomponent.

Materials

Materials are located on the pages that follow the Activity Plan. Most materials are non-consumable to be prepared and used repeatedly (e.g., word cards can be laminated). Some materials are consumable and will need to be duplicated for each student doing the activity. Other materials, such as counters, are commonly found in most classrooms.

Activity Statement

One sentence explanation of the purpose of the activity and what students do to complete the activity.

Activity Steps

The first step describes how to setup the center. The second step begins with: The student, Students, Working in pairs, or Taking turns depending on the number of students needed to complete the activity. The second step also starts the series of steps to complete the activity. The next steps explain what the student does to complete the activity. The last step lists one of three accountability methods: Self-check, Peer evaluation, or Teacher evaluation.

Example

A visual of the activity and key materials.

Extensions and Adaptations

Suggestions that extend or provide an adaptation for additional practice on the skill addressed in the activity. Materials for the extensions and adaptations are included after the pages that align to the Activity Plan.

Users may use the FCRR Student Center Activities resources as long as modifications are not made, the resources will only be used for non-profit educational purposes, and the copyright belong jointly to the Florida Department of Education and the Florida Center for Reading Research. These resources may not be used for any commercial purposes. These resources on our site may be linked to but not reposted, reproduced, modified, or copied to other sites. For questions about the use of these resources, please contact The Florida Center for Reading Research at fcrr@fcrr.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From 2004 to 2010, a team of researchers and teachers at FCRR collected ideas and created Student Center Activities for use in pre-kindergarten through fifth grade classrooms. The activities are designed for students to practice, demonstrate, and extend their learning of what has already been taught, sometimes with teacher assistance and sometimes independently.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sketching out a unit (possibilities and examples)

# data[].attributes.subject
Sketching out a unit (possibilities and examples)

# 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.headline
Print Referencing for Beginning Readers- Shared Reading Prompts

# data[].attributes.subject
Print Referencing for Beginning Readers- Shared Reading Prompts

# data[].attributes.headline
Read Aloud Planning Template: One Way...

# data[].attributes.subject
Read Aloud Planning Template: One Way...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recently, I wrote about the science of reading. I explained how I thought the term should be defined and described the kind of research needed to prescribe instruction.

Today I thought I'd put some meat on the bone; adding some details that might help readers to grasp the implications of a scientific or research-based approach to reading.
What does it mean when someone says an approach to reading instruction "works"?
The term "it works" has gnawed at me for more than fifty years! I remember as a teacher how certain activities or approaches grabbed me. They just seemed right. Then I'd try them out in my classroom and judge some to work, and others not so much.

But why?

What was it that led me to believe some of them "worked" and some didn't?

It puzzled me even then.

Teachers, administrators, and researchers seem to have different notions of "what works."

Teachers, I think, depend heavily on student response. If an activity engages the kids, we see it as hopeful. We give credence to whether an activity elicits groans or a buzz of activity.

When I do a classroom demonstration and students say they liked the activity and want to do more, most likely I've won that teacher over.

Teachers recognize that learning requires engagement, so when an activity pulls kids in, they're convinced that it's a good idea.

That satisfaction is sometimes denigrated because of its potential vapidity. Let's face it. Bozo the Clown engages kids, too, but with how much learning?

What those complaints fail to recognize is that the teacher already has bought into the the pedagogical value of the activity. They assume it is effective. Student engagement is like gaining a third Michelin star.

What about administrators?

Their needs are different. To them, "it works," is more about adult acceptance. If a program is adopted, the materials shipments arrive as promised, and neither teachers nor parents complain, it works!

And, to researchers?

To them, it means there has been an experimental study that compared that approach with some other and found it to be superior in terms of fostering learning.

If a method does no better than "business as usual" classroom practice, then it doesn't work (which, confusingly, isn't entirely correct, since the difference isn't that everybody in one group learned and nobody in the other did).

I've worn all those hats - teacher, administrator, researcher - and I prefer the last one. The reason? Because it's the only one that explicitly bases the judgment on student learning.
RELATED: What's the Role of Amount of Reading Instruction? Will we accomplish higher achievement if we follow research and make our teaching consistent with the science?
That's the basic idea, but even that doesn't appear to be well understood.

I think we tend to get misled by medical science, particularly pharmacology.

New drugs are studied so thoroughly it's possible for scientists to say that a particular nostrum will provide benefit 94% of the time and that 28% of patients will probably suffer some unfortunate side effect.

When I tell you that the research shows that a particular kind of instruction works (i.e., it led to more learning), I can't tell you how likely it is that you will be able to make it work, too.

Our education studies reveal whether someone has managed to make an approach successful.

Our evidence indicates possibility, not certainty.

When we encourage you to teach like it was done in the studies, we are saying, "if they made it work, you may be able to make it work, too."

That's why I'm such a fan of multiple studies.

The more times other people have made an approach work under varied circumstances, the more likely you'll be able to find a way to make it work as well.

If you show me one such study, it seems possible I could match their success. Show me 38, and it seems even more likely that I could pull it off.

That nuance highlights an important point: Our instructional methods don't have automatic effects. We, as teachers, make these methods work.

Lackadaisical implementation of instruction is never likely to have good results. The teacher who thinks passive implementation of a science-based program is what works is in for a sad awakening.

I assure you that in the studies, everyone worked hard to make sure there were learning payoffs for the kids. That's part of what made it work better than the business-as-usual approach.

That point is too often muffled by our rhetoric around science-based reading. But teacher buy-in, teacher effort, and teacher desire to see a program work for the kids are all ingredients in success.
I don't get it, I'm hearing that some approach (e.g., 3-cueing) is harmful, and, yet I know of research-based programs that teach it. Does that make any sense?
You're right about 3-cueing being part of some successful programs. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Instructional programs usually include multiple components. Studies of them tell if the program has been effective, but they usually say little about the various components that are integral to the program.

Without a direct test of the individual components, there are three possibilities: (1) a component may be an active ingredient, one of the reasons for the success; or (2) it's a neutral ingredient -- drop it and kids would do as well; or (3) it's hurtful, the instruction would be even more effective without it.

Logically, 3-cueing makes no sense. It emphasizes behaviors good readers eschew.

That said, I know of no research that has evaluated 3-cueing specifically.

Claims that it's harmful (beyond being a likely time waster) are, for the time being, overstatements. These claims rely on logic, not data.

The problem that you identify is a common one - people will tell you that multisensory instruction, a sole focus on decodable texts, advanced phonemic awareness, more social studies lessons, word walls, sound walls, and so on are all certain roads to improved achievement. Each is part of at least one successful program or another. But none have been evaluated directly. The truth is, we really don't know if they have any value at all.

They might provide benefits, but that isn't the same thing as knowing that they have done so before.
Our district has adopted new programs and instructional routines based on science. But our kids aren't doing any better than before. Does that make any sense?
No, that makes no sense at all. The purpose of any kind of educational reform - including science-based reform - is to increase learning. The whole point is higher average reading scores or a reduction in the numbers of struggling students.

Whoever's in charge should take this lack of success seriously and should be asking - and finding answers - to the following questions?

Were these changes really based on the science and what does that mean?

Administrators often make choices based on minimal information. It is better to vet these things before adopting them, but in a case like this one, it is never too late to find out if the reform scheme was really consistent with the science.

How has the amount of reading instruction to students changed?

Some approaches work better than others because they have a bigger footprint. They provide a greater amount of teaching than business-as-usual approaches. Adopting such programs without making the schedule changes to facilitate their implantation will likely undermine potential success. Are kids getting more instruction, less instruction, or about the same as before?

How is the amount of reading instruction apportioned among phonemic awareness, phonics, text reading fluency, reading comprehension strategies, written language ability, and writing?

Often the adoption of new programs or reform efforts aimed at a particular piece of the puzzle lead to greater attention to certain abilities, but to diminished attention to other key parts of literacy. Make sure that you aren't trading more phonics for less fluency work, or more vocabulary for less comprehension. You want to make sure that all components of reading are receiving adequate attention - not going overboard with some and neglecting others.

To what extent are teachers using the programs?

Compliance matters in program implementation. The adage that "teachers can do whatever they want when the door is closed" highlights one of the biggest roadblocks to making such efforts work. You need to make sure you have sufficient buy in for the men and women who do the daily teaching. You bought a new program or set new instructional policies. Are they being used or followed?

How well prepared are the teachers to provide the required instruction?

Program adoption requires a lot more than issuing a policy proclamation. Research shows that program implementation supported by substantial professional development is much more successful than just buying a program. You need to make sure that you've built the capacity for success and not just expected magic to happen.
READ MORE: Shanahan On Literacy Blog References
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S235-S247.

Stanovich, P. J. , & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Using research and reason in education. Washington, DC: National Institute of Literacy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Myths of the Science of Reading Era | Shanahan on Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Shanahan blog explores what it means when we say a method, approach, or program “works” in scientific terms. Read more here about Myths of the Science of Reading Era!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Workshop Planning Across Week -Mock-up Detailed

# data[].attributes.headline
Language Comprehension Planning Template- Another way...

# data[].attributes.subject
Language Comprehension Planning Template- Another way...

# data[].attributes.headline
Print Referencing Shared Reading Example- Heidi Anne Mesmer

# data[].attributes.subject
Print Referencing Shared Reading Example- Heidi Anne Mesmer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Do a Shared Reading With Print Referencing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kindergarten and First Grade Student Center Activities Phonological Awareness | Phonics | Fluency | Vocabulary | Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Effective and Efficient Teaching

By Anita L. Archer and Charles A. Hughes

Explicit instruction is systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented-and has been shown to promote achievement for all students. This highly practical and accessible resource gives special and general education teachers the tools to implement explicit instruction in any grade level or content area. The authors are leading experts who provide clear guidelines for identifying key concepts, strategies, skills, and routines to teach; designing and delivering effective lessons; and giving students opportunities to practice and master new material. Sample lesson plans, lively examples, and reproducible checklists and teacher worksheets enhance the utility of the volume.

This title is part of the What Works for Special-Needs Learners Series, edited by Karen R. Harris and Steve Graham.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explicit Instructions | Effective and Efficient Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Anita L. Archer and Charles A. Hughes Explicit instruction is systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented-and has been shown to promote achievement for all students. This highly practical and accessible resource gives special and general education teachers the tools to implement explicit instruction in any grade level or content area.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Purpose of Text Types for Shared Reading 2023

# 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