# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LETRS-Trained Teachers Help Students Excel

# data[].attributes.headline
LETRS - Onslow School District's Insights (Video)

# data[].attributes.subject
LETRS - Onslow School District's Insights (Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Onslow County Schools' Journey Using LETRS - A teacher's perspective

# data[].attributes.headline
EAB Infographic - How Our Brain Learns to Read

# data[].attributes.subject
EAB Infographic - How Our Brain Learns to Read

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While our brains are naturally set up to learn to speak, learning to read does not happen on its own. Early readers must develop certain parts of the brain and build connections between brain areas that were not connected before.

Our infographic, created for the elementary classroom, presents a simplified depiction of how our brains learn to read. Download this infographic to illustrate the four different areas of our brains that we use when reading and the critical skills that help develop them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Our Brains Learn to Read | K-12 Research | EAB

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brains are naturally set up to learn to speak, but not to read. Our infographic presents a simplified depiction of how our brains learn to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is dyslexia? - Kelli Sandman-Hurley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Dyslexia Is

Dyslexia affects about one in every five individuals, making it the most commonly diagnosed learning disability. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) describes dyslexia as a brain-based learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read. Other definitions (e.g., First Step Act - § 3635; International Dyslexia Association; Mayo Clinic) describe dyslexia in a similar way. The reading impairments associated with dyslexia are also unexpected in that individuals with dyslexia typically demonstrate otherwise typical intellectual functioning and developmental growth. To further understand what dyslexia is - and what it is not - it may be helpful to examine the major elements of the definition.

Dyslexia is Brain-Based

For individuals with dyslexia, specific portions of the brain typically associated with important reading processes may not develop or function in the same ways that they do in individuals without dyslexia. Neuroimaging research suggests that individuals with dyslexia - compared to individuals without - may have fundamental differences in brain regions linked with reading and language. These differences are primarily, although not completely, noted in the left hemisphere of the brain.

Dyslexia affects the brain areas associated with detection and processing of sounds and their corresponding letters. These letter-sound linkages are fundamental to reading. When these brain regions do not function efficiently to make these connections, reading development is affected.

Dyslexia can be inherited. Children born with the neurological impairments associated with dyslexia are more likely than other children to have family members with the impairment. Many, but not all, of these children will eventually experience reading difficulties.

Dyslexia Impairs the Ability to Read

Individuals with dyslexia often have difficulty with phonological processing, spelling, or rapid visual-verbal responding.

Difficulty with phonological processing inhibits the ability to effectively decode letters into blended sounds to form words. A fundamental phonological processing problem may "block" access to other more advanced aspects of reading, such as word identification and comprehension.

Difficulty with spelling may be recognized in an inability to efficiently write the letters comprising words from memory. Increased time needed to spell words and spelling errors may be apparent.

Difficulty with rapid visual-verbal responding may be evident when it is increasingly difficult to quickly verbalize the letters and words appearing in print when prompted to do so.

What Dyslexia Is Not

Dyslexia is related to reading difficulties, not difficulties that arise from intellectual functioning.

Dyslexia does not imply the individual cannot read. People with dyslexia can learn to read with evidence-based explicit instruction, but may still have to put forth more effort.

Dyslexia does not otherwise impact the brain structure or functioning, or the intellectual, imaginative, or emotional functioning of the individual. In non-reading areas, abilities of those with dyslexia mirror those without dyslexia.

Individuals with dyslexia do not necessarily see and write letters or words backwards. Dyslexia is associated with brain-based phonological impairments, not visual problems.

Infographic

Enlarge Infographic

Suggested Citation

Stanley, C. & Petscher, Y. (2017). Defining Dyslexia. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Office of Special Education Programs, National Center on Improving Literacy. Retrieved from http://improvingliteracy.org

References

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (n.d.). What are reading disorders? Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/reading/conditioninfo/pages/disorders.aspx

Abstract

Dyslexia is a brain-based learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What Dyslexia Is Dyslexia affects about one in every five individuals, making it the most commonly diagnosed learning disability. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) describes dyslexia as a brain-based learning disability that specifically impairs a person's ability to read. Other definitions (e.g., First Step Act - § 3635; International Dyslexia Association; Mayo Clinic) describe dyslexia in a similar way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia Awareness Part 1: Module 1 - About Dyslexia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For many, fall is synonymous with back-to-school activities and starting the new academic year on a strong note. It is also a time to raise awareness about dyslexia. Since the early 2000s, the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) has set aside the month of October to do just that. More recently in 2015, Congress voted to designate October as National Dyslexia Awareness Month.

According to the IDA, dyslexia is a "learning disability that is neurobiological in origin [and is] characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities." The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity estimates that 15-20% of the world's population displays characteristics of dyslexia.

Although dyslexia is common among individuals of all ages, misinformation about the learning disability is equally common. To set the record straight and celebrate National Dyslexia Awareness Month, we're dispelling nine common myths.
MYTH #1: Only school-aged children develop dyslexia.
Because dyslexia is innate, characteristics can appear in children as young as two or three years old. Early signs for children under the age of five include delayed speech, difficulties remembering the alphabet, and mispronouncing common words.
MYTH #2: Dyslexia stems from vision problems.
You regularly hear that people with dyslexia see letters and words out of order, but this isn't caused by vision issues. Dyslexia is a brain-based learning disability. In fact, scans have revealed that the brain of an individual with dyslexia functions differently when it comes to reading text than the brain of someone without the learning disability.
MYTH #3: Dyslexia disappears once a child learns how to read.
While people with dyslexia can become fluent, skilled readers, there is no cure. Individuals with dyslexia can achieve success both in school and in life with early intervention and proper science-based instruction.
MYTH #4: Dyslexia is linked to a person's level of intelligence or motivation.
Dyslexia is often mistakenly attributed to a low level of intelligence or a lack of motivation. The truth is, students with dyslexia aren't lazy and in some cases try even harder than their classmates to master reading. Individuals with dyslexia require additional support and multisensory structured learning to create lasting literacy skills.
MYTH #5: Dyslexia is caused by a lack of reading at home.
Since dyslexia is a neurobiological learning disability, individuals can't develop it from limited reading in the home. However, a lack of reading practice at home can hinder the progress of adults learning to read. For children with dyslexia, parents can use creative ways to encourage reading outside of the classroom.
MYTH #6: Dyslexia is extremely rare.
It's easy to dismiss the prevalence of dyslexia if you think the learning disability hasn't impacted your life or the life of a loved one. More commonly, people can identify individuals in their lives that have struggled to learn to read and spell. It's estimated that 70-80% of people with reading difficulties have dyslexia, ranging from mild to severe.
MYTH #7: Dyslexia is only present in English-speaking students.
Whether a child is fluent in Spanish, Chinese, or German, dyslexia affects children who speak all languages. Researchers have found that the neuroscience behind dyslexia is the same, regardless of a child's native language.
MYTH #8: A lack of phonics instruction can cause dyslexia.
Although it is a critical component of reading, dyslexia is not caused by insufficient phonics instruction. Successful readers also require explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. Offering children educational programs that promote these core components will create a foundation for higher-level reading skills.
MYTH #9: Boys are much more likely to have dyslexia than girls.
Although the exact percentage has fluctuated throughout the years, studies have shown that dyslexia affects both genders at a comparable rate. Despite these findings, teachers have been found to refer more boys for dyslexia evaluations.

While dyslexia affects every individual differently, students with dyslexia can successfully learn to read when provided with the proper tools and instruction. By dispelling common myths, we take another step toward developing the next generation of fluent, independent readers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dyslexia Myths Debunked - Wilson Language Training Corporation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For many, fall is synonymous with back-to-school activities and starting the new academic year on a strong note. It is also a time to raise awareness about dyslexia. Since the early 2000s, the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) has set aside the month of October to do just that.

# data[].attributes.body
Podcast Discussion Guide: https://amplify.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/CKLA_SOR_Podcast_Discussion_Guide_McCandliss_041520.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S1-12. Neuroscience and early literacy: Dr. Bruce McCandliss - Science of Reading: The Podcast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Susan and Dr. Bruce McCandliss, a professor in the Graduate School of Education at Stanford University, chat about combining neuroscience with education. How does neuroscience help us understand the changes going on in the brain of a child learning to read? Why do some children struggle so profou...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading Strategies Bookmarks - SPELD NSW

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Download these printable Blending Strategies bookmarks to use with your students! These bookmarks outline three different blending strategies students can use to decode unknown words - segment & blend, connected phonation and additive blending.

# data[].attributes.headline
Video Introduction to SCDE Dyslexia Handbook

# data[].attributes.subject
Video Introduction to SCDE Dyslexia Handbook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Brain Prize Presents: Stanislas Dehaene

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Blachman, B. A., Ball, E. W., Black, R., & Tangel, D. M. (2000). Road to the code: A phonological awareness program for young children. Baltimore: Brookes.

Clay, M. (1993). Reading Recovery: A Guidebook for Teachers in Training. NH: Heinemann.

Elkonin, D. (1971). "Development of Speech". In A.V. Zaporozhets and D. B. Elkonin (Eds.). The Psychology of Preschool Children. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

Ellis, E. (1997). How Now Brown Cow: Phoneme Awareness Activities.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Elkonin boxes build phonological awareness skills by segmenting words into individual sounds, or phonemes. To use Elkonin boxes, a child listens to a word and moves a token into a box for each sound or phoneme. In some cases different colored tokens may be used for consonants and vowels or just for each phoneme in the word.

# data[].attributes.headline
EdWeek.org How do kids learn to read? What the science says...

# data[].attributes.subject
EdWeek.org How do kids learn to read? What the science says...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NOTE: The text of this article contains annotations. To view the list of annotations, please scroll to the bottom of the page.
How do children learn to read?

For almost a century, researchers have argued over the question. Most of the disagreement has centered on the very beginning stages of the reading process, when young children are first starting to figure out how to decipher words on a page.

One theory is that reading is a natural process, like learning to speak. If teachers and parents surround children with good books, this theory goes, kids will pick up reading on their own. Another idea suggests that reading is a series of strategic guesses based on context, and that kids should be taught these guessing strategies.

But research has shown that reading is not a natural process(1), and it's not a guessing game. Written language is a code. Certain combinations of letters predictably represent certain sounds. And for the last few decades, the research has been clear: Teaching young kids how to crack the code-teaching systematic phonics-is the most reliable way to make sure that they learn how to read words.

Of course, there is more to reading than seeing a word on a page and pronouncing it out loud. As such, there is more to teaching reading than just teaching phonics. Reading requires children to make meaning out of print. They need to know the different sounds in spoken language and be able to connect those sounds to written letters in order to decipher words. They need deep background and vocabulary knowledge so that they understand the words they read. Eventually, they need to be able to recognize most words automatically and read connected text fluently, attending to grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure.

But knowing how to decode is an essential step in becoming a reader. If children can't decipher the precise words on the page, they'll never become fluent readers or understand the passages they're reading.

That's why we've put together this overview of the research on early reading, in grades K-2. It covers what's known about how we should teach letter-sound patterns, and what we don't know for sure yet. It touches on what else should be part of early reading programs. And it explains why we know that most children can't learn to read through osmosis or guessing.

Here's what the evidence shows.

Don't children learn to read the way they learn to speak?

Infants learn to speak (2) by listening to and repeating sounds made by adults and connecting them to meanings. They don't consciously distinguish individual sound units (called phonemes) when hearing spoken language. Some research suggests infants learn probabilistically-for example, hearing the sound "ball" at the same time as the sight of a round, bouncy object over time makes the child associate the two-while other studies suggest children map meaning to a word after experiencing it just once or twice. Within the first two years, typically developing toddlers' brains focus on the most common sounds in their native languages and connect those sounds to meaning. A child develops understanding of speech through exposure to language and opportunities to practice the "serve and return"(3) patterns of conversation, even without explicit instruction.

By contrast, children do not naturally develop reading skill through exposure to text. The way they learn to connect oral and written language(4) depends on what kind of language(5) they are learning to read.

Alphabetic languages, like English or French, use letters to stand for sounds that make up spoken words. To read an alphabetic language, children must learn how written letters represent spoken sounds(6), recognize patterns of letter sounds as words, and match those to spoken words whose meanings they know. This differs from Chinese, for example. It uses a tonal spoken language, conveying meaning with small differences in stress or pitch. Its writing system is partially logographic-in which written symbols correspond directly to a word or concept-and also includes words that couple symbols for meaning and symbols for sound. Someone reading Chinese hanzi characters could not "sound out" unfamiliar words character by character(7).

What is systematic, explicit phonics instruction, and why is it important?

Connecting printed letters on a page to written sounds isn't intuitive(8). While some young children may make those connections themselves, most do not. One set of studies from 1989-90 illustrates this phenomenon well(9).

In these studies, conducted by Brian Byrne and Ruth Fielding-Barnsley, researchers taught young children between ages 3 and 5 to read whole words aloud, like "fat" and "bat." These children didn't already know their letter names.

Then, the researchers tested whether the children could transfer their knowledge to reading a new word. They gave them the word "fun," and asked whether the word was "fun" or "bun." Very few of the students could do this successfully. They couldn't break down the original word into phonemes and then transfer their knowledge of those phonemes to a new word.

But children could succeed on this task if they were first given some explicit instructions. When children were taught how to recognize that certain letters represented certain sounds, and taught how to segment words to identify those individual letters and sounds, they had much greater success on the original transfer test. Neuroscience research has since confirmed and helped explain these findings. When learning how to read new words in an unfamiliar made-up language, participants had more long-term success if they were first taught which symbols correspond to which sounds, than if they tried to remember words as wholes. Brain imaging of these readers finds that the two teaching strategies tap into different neural pathways in the brain. Readers taught to connect print to meaning directly could recall words initially more quickly, but less accurately; readers taught to connect print to sound and then to meaning read aloud more quickly and correctly, better recalled the correct meanings of words, and transferred their knowledge to new words.

Decades of research has shown that explicit phonics instruction benefits early readers, but particularly those who struggle to read.

That's because small strengths or deficits at the start of reading compound over time. It's what reading expert Keith Stanovich in 1986 dubbed(10) the "Matthew Effect in Reading,"(11) after the Bible verse in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer: "The combination of deficient decoding skills, lack of practice, and difficult materials results in unrewarding early reading experiences that lead to less involvement in reading-related activities," Stanovich wrote. "Lack of exposure and practice on the part of the less-skilled reader delays the development of automaticity and speed at the word recognition level. Slow, capacity-draining word-recognition processes require cognitive resources that should be allocated to comprehension. Thus, reading for meaning is hindered; unrewarding reading experiences multiply; and practice is avoided or merely tolerated without real cognitive involvement."

My reading curriculum includes letter-sound instruction. Am I providing enough phonics?

Not all phonics instruction is created equal.

The most effective phonics programs are those that are systematic. The National Reading Panel found this in 2000(12), and since then, further research reviews have confirmed that this type of instruction leads to the greatest gains in reading accuracy for young students(13).

A systematic phonics program teaches an ordered progression of letter-sound correspondences. Teachers don't only address the letter-sound connections that students stumble over. Instead, they address all of the combinations methodically, in a sequence, moving on to the next once students demonstrate mastery. Teachers explicitly tell students what sounds correspond to what letter patterns, rather than asking students to figure it out on their own or make guesses.

In one series of experiments(14), Stanford University neuroscientist Bruce McCandliss(15) and his colleagues made up a new written language and taught three-letter words to students either by asking them to focus on letter sounds or on whole words. Later, the students took a reading test of both the words they were taught and new words in the made-up language, while an electroencephalograph monitored their brain activity. Those who had focused on letter sounds had more neural activity on the left side of the brain, which includes visual and language regions and is associated with more skilled reading. Those who had been taught to focus on whole words had more activity on the right side of the brain, which has been characteristically associated with adults and children who struggle with reading. Moreover, those who had learned letter sounds were better able to identify unfamiliar words.

Early readers benefit from systematic phonics instruction. Among students in grades K-1, phonics instruction led to improvements in decoding ability and reading comprehension across the board, according to the National Reading Panel(16). Children at risk of developing future reading problems, children with disabilities, and children from all socio-economic backgrounds all benefited. Later research reviews have confirmed that systematic phonics instruction is effective for students with disabilities, and shown that it also works for English-language learners(17).

Most studies of phonics instruction test its immediate effectiveness-after the intervention, are children better readers? Among students in older grades, the results are less clear. A recent meta-analysis of the long-term effects of reading interventions(18) looked at phonics and phonemic awareness training, mostly in studies with children in grades K-1. Both phonics and phonemic awareness interventions improved reading comprehension at an immediate post-test. But while the benefits of phonemic awareness interventions persisted in a follow-up test, the benefits of phonics interventions faded much more over time. The average length of all interventions included in the study was about 40 hours, and the follow-up assessments were conducted about a year after the interventions were complete, on average.

Some of my students didn't need phonics instruction to learn to read. Why are you saying that all kids benefit?

Depending on the estimate(19), anywhere from 1 percent to 7 percent of children figure out how to decode words on their own, without explicit instruction. They may spot the patterns in books read to them or print they see in their environment, and then they apply these patterns. These include children with a neurotypical form of "hyperlexia"(20)-a condition in which children may begin decoding as early as 3-but this is more frequently associated with children who have autism-spectrum disorders and often have separate problems with reading comprehension.

It may seem like these children are reading words as whole units, or using guessing strategies to figure out what comes next in the story. But they are attending to all of the words' individual letters-they're just doing it very quickly(21).

A systematic phonics program can still benefit these students, who may have gaps in their knowledge of spelling patterns or words that they haven't encountered yet. Of course, phonics instruction-like all teaching-can and should be differentiated to meet the needs of individual students where they are. If a student can demonstrate mastery of a sound, there's no need to continue practicing that sound-he or she should move on to the next one.

There's another answer to this question: Students may look like they're decoding when they're actually not. For example, a child may see an illustration of an apple falling from a tree, and correctly guess that the sentence below the picture describes an apple falling from a tree. This isn't reading, and it doesn't give the teacher useful information about how a student will tackle a book without pictures.

Can cueing strategies help students to read?

Many early reading classrooms teach students strategies to identify a word by guessing with the help of context cues. Ken and Yetta Goodman of the University of Arizona(22) developed a "three-cueing system," based on analysis of common errors (or "miscues") when students read aloud. Ken Goodman famously called reading development a "psycholinguistic guessing game,"(23) and cueing systems teach students to guess at a new word based on:

Meaning/Semantics, or background knowledge and context, such as vocabulary a student has already learned;

Structure/Syntax, or how the word fits in common grammar rules, such as whether the word's position in a sentence suggests it is a noun, verb, or adjective; and

Visual/Graphophonics, or what a word looks like, such as how upper- and lowercase letters are used (suggesting a proper noun, for example) or common spelling patterns.

Cueing systems are a common strategy in whole-language programs, and also are used in many "balanced literacy" programs that incorporate phonics instruction. Cueing systems were designed by analyzing errors(24) rather than practices of proficient readers, and have not shown benefits in controlled experiments(25).

Moreover, cognitive and neuroscience studies have found that guessing is a much less efficient way to identify a new word, and a mark of beginning or struggling readers, not proficient readers. Skilled readers instead sound out new words to decode them.

Balanced literacy programs often include both phonics and cueing, but studies suggest cueing instruction can make it more difficult for children to develop phonics skills because it takes their attention away from the letter sounds.

I know phonics instruction is supposed to be explicit and systematic. But beyond that, how should I teach it? Does the research say anything about what content I need to cover, and how should it be sequenced?

There is a general path that most children follow as they become skilled decoders. Research can tell us how children usually progress along this path, and which skills specifically predict better reading performance.

Before starting kindergarten, children generally develop some early phonological awareness-an understanding of the sounds that make up spoken language. They can rhyme, break down multi-syllable words, and recognize alliteration(26).

A next step in the process is understanding that graphemes-combinations of one or more letters-represent phonemes, the smallest units of spoken language. It's easier for students to learn these letter-sound correspondences(27) if they already have early phonological skills like rhyming and alliteration, along with knowledge of the names of the letters of the alphabet.

And while vocabulary is important for reading comprehension, research has also found that it's a component in decoding ability. One study found that when children know a word's meaning, they can more quickly learn how to recognize it automatically(28), because the visual letters, corresponding sounds, and meaning all map together when a reader recognizes a word.

There are other early skills that relate to later reading and writing ability as well(29), regardless of IQ or socio-economic status. Among these are writing letters, remembering spoken information for a short time, rapidly naming sequences of random letters, numbers, or pictures, and other phonological skills-like the ability to segment words into phonemes.

To decode words, students need to be taught to blend together the phonemes that graphemes represent on the page. For example, a young reader must learn to recognize that /r/, /o/, /d/ are three sounds that together form the word "rod," but also that the word "rock" also contains three sounds, /r/, /o/, /k/ This is a process that builds on itself rapidly. Though there are some 15,000 syllables in English(30), after a child has learned the 44 most common sound and letter combinations(31), they will begin to sound out words as they read. These include both the basic letter and vowel sounds, but also common combinations such as "th," "sh," and "-ing." There are two main ways to demonstrate to children that words are made up of sound-letter correspondences. In one method, students learn the sounds of the letters first and then blend these phonemes together to sound out words. That's synthetic phonics-they're synthesizing phonemes into greater whole words. The other method, analytic phonics, takes an inverted approach: Students identify-or analyze-the phonemes within words, and then use that knowledge to read other words.

Take the word "bat." In synthetic phonics, students would first learn the /b/ sound, then the /a/ sound, then the /t/ sound and blend them together to sound out "bat." In analytic phonics, students would learn the word "bat" alongside words like "cat," "mat," and "hat," and would be taught that all these words end in the "at" sound pattern.

So there's synthetic phonics and analytic phonics-is one way better than the other?

A few studies have found synthetic phonics to be more effective than analytic phonics. Most notably, a seven-year longitudinal study from Scotland found that synthetic phonics taught in 1st grade gave students an advantage in reading and spelling over analytic phonics(32). Still, when examined as a whole, the larger body of reading research doesn't surface a conclusive winner. Two landmark research reviews(33) haven't found a significant difference in the effectiveness of the two methods. Other more recent research is still inconclusive(34).

Do these strategies apply to words that don't follow traditional sound-spelling patterns? What about words like "one" and "friend"-can those words still be taught with phonics?

Yes, but not alone; spelling and semantic rules go hand-in-hand with teaching letter sounds. Words like "lime" and "dime," have similar spelling and pronunciation. But some words with similar spelling have different pronunciations, like "pint" and "mint." And others have different spellings and similar pronunciations, like "jazz" and "has." Brain imaging studies(35) find that when readers see word pairs that are inconsistent, they show greater activity in the areas of the brain associated with processing both visual spelling and spoken words. This shows that young readers use systems of understanding of both printed shapes and sounds when they see any written word. When those two systems conflict, the reader may call on additional rules, such as understanding that words at the end of lines of a rhyming poem (such as "has" and "jazz") likely rhyme even if their spelling would not suggest it.

Some research has found that teaching common irregular words, like "one" and "friend," as sight words can be effective(36). Still, in these studies, children were also taught phonics along with sight words-and that's important. Understanding phonics gives students the foundation to read these irregular words. Take "friend." While the "ie" doesn't produce the same sound it normally does, the other letters in the word do. Research has suggested(37) that children use the "fr" and the "nd" as a framework when they remember how to read the irregular word "friend."

When should children start to learn how to sound out words? Is there a "too early"?

Even very young children can benefit from instruction designed to develop phonological awareness. The National Early Literacy Panel Report (2009)(38), a meta-analysis of early literacy studies, found that teaching preschoolers and kindergartners how to distinguish the sounds in words, whether orally or in relationship to print, improved their reading and writing ability. The children in these studies were generally between the ages of 3 and 5.

Studies suggest progress in phonics is less closely linked to a child's age than to the size and complexity of his spoken vocabulary, and to his opportunities to practice and apply new phonics rules. There is some evidence(39) that "decodable" books(40), designed to help students practice specific letter-sound combinations, can benefit the earliest readers. But it is mixed, and students very quickly progress enough to get more benefit from texts that provide more complex and irregular words-and often texts that students find more interesting.

How much time should teachers spend on teaching about letters and sounds in class?

There isn't yet a definitive "best" amount of time to spend on phonics instruction. In several meta-analyses, researchers haven't found a direct link between program length and effectiveness(41).

The National Reading Panel report found that programs focusing on phonemic awareness, the ability to hear, identify, and manipulate the smallest units of speech sounds, that lasted less than 20 hours total had the greatest effect on reading skills. Across the studies that the researchers looked at, individual sessions lasted 25 minutes on average.

But the authors of the NRP are quick to point out that these patterns are descriptive, not prescriptive. The studies they looked at weren't specifically testing the effectiveness of different time lengths, and it may be that time wasn't the relevant factor in these shorter programs performing better.

Eventually, a skilled reader doesn't need to sound out every word that she reads. She sees the word and recognizes it immediately. Through reading the word again and again over time, her brain has linked this particular sequence to this word, through a process called orthographic mapping(42).

But neuroscience research has shown that even if it feels like she's recognizing the word as a whole, she's still attending to the sequence of individual letters in the word for an incredibly short period of time. That's how skilled readers can tell the difference between the words "accent" and "ascent."

What else-aside from phonics-is part of a research-based early reading program?

Phonics is essential to a research-based reading program. If students can't decode words, they can't derive any meaning from them. But understanding the alphabetic code doesn't automatically make students good readers. There are five essential components of reading(43): phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.

The National Reading Panel addressed all five of these components. The researchers found that having students read out loud with guidance and feedback improved reading fluency. Vocabulary instruction, both explicit and implicit, led to better reading comprehension-and it was most effective when students had multiple opportunities to see and use new words in context. They also found that teaching comprehension strategies can also lead to gains in reading achievement, though most of these studies were done with students older than 2nd grade.

For younger students, oral language skills; understanding syntax, grammar, vocabulary, and idioms; and having general and topic-specific background knowledge are also essential for reading comprehension.

This is one of the premises of the Simple View of Reading(44), a framework to understand reading first proposed by researchers Philip B. Gough and William E. Tunmer in 1986(45). In the simple view, reading comprehension is the product of decoding ability and language comprehension. If a student can't decode, it doesn't matter how much background knowledge and vocabulary(46) he understands-he won't be able to understand what's on the page. But the opposite is also true: If a student can decode but doesn't have a deep enough understanding of oral language, he won't be able to understand the words he can say out loud. Since Gough and Tunmer first proposed this framework, many studies have confirmed its basic structure-that comprehension and decoding are separate processes(47). One meta-analysis of reading intervention studies finds that phonics-focused interventions were most effective through grade 1; in older grades-when most students will have mastered phonics-interventions that targeted comprehension or a mix of reading skills showed bigger effects(48) on students' reading skills.

For young students, early oral-language interventions can help set them up for success even before they start formal school.

The National Early Literacy Panel found that both reading books to young children and engaging in activities aimed at improving their language development improved their oral language skills(49).

If children don't learn to read naturally from being exposed to reading, why are parents and teachers encouraged to read to infants and preschoolers?

The amount of time adults read with preschoolers and young children(50) does predict their reading skills in elementary school. One of the most important predictors of how well a child will learn to read is the size and quality of his spoken language and vocabulary, and children are more likely to be exposed to new words and their meanings or pick up grammar rules from reading aloud with adults.

In a series of studies in the late 1990s of 5-year-olds who had not yet learned to read, Victoria Purcell-Gates(51) found that after controlling for the income and education level of the children's parents, children who had been read to regularly in the last two years used more "literary" language, longer phrases, and more sophisticated sentence structures. Moreover, an adult reading with a child is more likely to explain or expand on the meanings of words and concepts that the child does not already know, adding to their background knowledge.

Reading with trusted adults also helps children develop a love of reading. "The association between hearing written language and feeling loved provides the best foundation for this long process [of emergent literacy], and no cognitive scientist or educational researcher could have designed a better one," notes cognitive neuroscientist Maryanne Wolf(52).

What about independent choice reading?

In a choice reading period-also known as sustained silent reading or Drop Everything and Read-students get to pick a book to read independently in class for a set amount of time. The premise behind this activity is that children need time to practice reading skills on their own to improve.

There is a lot of correlational research that shows that children who read more are better readers(53). But many of these studies don't quantify how much reading students are actually doing. While they may specify a time frame-15 minutes of sustained silent reading, for example-the studies don't report whether kids spend this time reading. That makes it difficult to know how effective choice reading actually is.

More importantly, these studies don't provide experimental evidence-it's not clear whether reading more is what makes students better readers, or if better readers are likely to read more. The National Reading Panel found that there wasn't evidence that choice reading improved students' fluency.

Does it make a difference whether children learn to read using printed books or digital ones?

In the last decade or so, access to Internet-based text has continued to expand, and schools have increasingly used digitally based books(54), particularly to support students who do not have easy access to paper books at home. Yet some emerging evidence suggests children learn to read differently in print versus digitally(55), in ways that could hinder their later comprehension.

Researchers that study eye movements find that those reading digital text are more likely to skim or read nonlinearly, looking for key words to give the gist, jump to the end to find conclusions or takeaways, and only sometimes go back to find context in the rest of the text. In a separate series of studies since 2015(56), researchers led by Anne Mangen found that students who read short stories and especially longer texts in a print format were better able to remember the plot and sequence of events than those who read the same text on a screen.

It's not yet clear how universal these changes are, but teachers may want to keep watch on how well their students reading electronically are developing deeper reading and comprehension skills.

Related Education Week Stories

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Do Kids Learn to Read? What the Science Says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The debate rages but the science is clear: Teaching systematic phonics is the most reliable way to make sure that kids learn how to read.

# data[].attributes.headline
WV Reading First Explicit Phonics Lessons

# data[].attributes.subject
WV Reading First Explicit Phonics Lessons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
West Virginia Reading First Explicit Phonics Lessons

# data[].attributes.headline
LETRS - Newcastle Elementary's Story (Video)

# data[].attributes.subject
LETRS - Newcastle Elementary's Story (Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Introduction to Articulatory Phonetics (Vowels)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dr. Mary Dahlgren "Sound Walls and Phonemes"

# data[].attributes.headline
Simple View of Reading & The Reading Rope

# data[].attributes.subject
Simple View of Reading & The Reading Rope

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Listen to this audio documentary on the Educate podcast. Subscribe now.

Molly Woodworth was a kid who seemed to do well at everything: good grades, in the gifted and talented program. But she couldn't read very well.

"There was no rhyme or reason to reading for me," she said. "When a teacher would dictate a word and say, 'Tell me how you think you can spell it,' I sat there with my mouth open while other kids gave spellings, and I thought, 'How do they even know where to begin?' I was totally lost."

Woodworth went to public school in Owosso, Michigan, in the 1990s. She says sounds and letters just didn't make sense to her, and she doesn't remember anyone teaching her how to read. So she came up with her own strategies to get through text.

Strategy 1: Memorize as many words as possible. "Words were like pictures to me," she said. "I had a really good memory."

Strategy 2: Guess the words based on context. If she came across a word she didn't have in her visual memory bank, she'd look at the first letter and come up with a word that seemed to make sense. Reading was kind of like a game of 20 Questions: What word could this be?

Strategy 3: If all else failed, she'd skip the words she didn't know.

Most of the time, she could get the gist of what she was reading. But getting through text took forever. "I hated reading because it was taxing," she said. "I'd get through a chapter and my brain hurt by the end of it. I wasn't excited to learn."

No one knew how much she struggled, not even her parents. Her reading strategies were her "dirty little secrets."

Woodworth, who now works in accounting, 1 says she's still not a very good reader and tears up when she talks about it. Reading "influences every aspect of your life," she said. She's determined to make sure her own kids get off to a better start than she did.

That's why she was so alarmed to see how her oldest child, Claire, was being taught to read in school.

As long as this disproven theory remains part of American education, many kids will likely struggle to learn how to read.

A couple of years ago, Woodworth was volunteering in Claire's kindergarten classroom. The class was reading a book together and the teacher was telling the children to practice the strategies that good readers use.

The teacher said, "If you don't know the word, just look at this picture up here," Woodworth recalled. "There was a fox and a bear in the picture. And the word was bear, and she said, 'Look at the first letter. It's a "b." Is it fox or bear?'"

Woodworth was stunned. "I thought, 'Oh my God, those are my strategies.' Those are the things I taught myself to look like a good reader, not the things that good readers do," she said. "These kids were being taught my dirty little secrets."

She went to the teacher and expressed her concerns. The teacher told her she was teaching reading the way the curriculum told her to.

Woodworth had stumbled on to American education's own little secret about reading: Elementary schools across the country are teaching children to be poor readers - and educators may not even know it.

For decades, reading instruction in American schools has been rooted in a flawed theory about how reading works, a theory that was debunked decades ago by cognitive scientists, yet remains deeply embedded in teaching practices and curriculum materials. As a result, the strategies that struggling readers use to get by - memorizing words, using context to guess words, skipping words they don't know - are the strategies that many beginning readers are taught in school. This makes it harder for many kids to learn how to read, and children who don't get off to a good start in reading find it difficult to ever master the process. 2

A shocking number of kids in the United States can't read very well. A third of all fourth-graders can't read at a basic level, and most students are still not proficient readers by the time they finish high school.
Percentage of U.S. fourth-graders below basic level in reading
When kids struggle to learn how to read, it can lead to a downward spiral in which behavior, vocabulary, knowledge and other cognitive skills are eventually affected by slow reading development. 3 A disproportionate number of poor readers become high school dropouts and end up in the criminal justice system. 4

The fact that a disproven theory about how reading works is still driving the way many children are taught to read is part of the problem. School districts spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on curriculum materials that include this theory. Teachers are taught the theory in their teacher preparation programs and on the job. As long as this disproven theory remains part of American education, many kids will likely struggle to learn how to read.
Percentage of U.S. 12th-graders proficient in reading
The origins

The theory is known as "three cueing." The name comes from the notion that readers use three different kinds of information - or "cues" - to identify words as they are reading.

The theory was first proposed in 1967, when an education professor named Ken Goodman presented a paper at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in New York City.

In the paper, 5 Goodman rejected the idea that reading is a precise process that involves exact or detailed perception of letters or words. Instead, he argued that as people read, they make predictions about the words on the page using these three cues:

graphic cues (what do the letters tell you about what the word might be?)

syntactic cues (what kind of word could it be, for example, a noun or a verb?)

semantic cues (what word would make sense here, based on the context?)

Goodman concluded that:

Skill in reading involves not greater precision, but more accurate first guesses based on better sampling techniques, greater control over language structure, broadened experiences and increased conceptual development. As the child develops reading skill and speed, he uses increasingly fewer graphic cues.

Goodman's proposal became the theoretical basis for a new approach to teaching reading that would soon take hold in American schools.

Previously, the question of how to teach reading had focused on one of two basic ideas.

One idea is that reading is a visual memory process. The teaching method associated with this idea is known as "whole word." The whole word approach was perhaps best embodied in the "Dick and Jane" books that first appeared in the 1930s. The books rely on word repetition, and pictures to support the meaning of the text. The idea is that if you see words enough, you eventually store them in your memory as visual images.

The other idea is that reading requires knowledge of the relationships between sounds and letters. Children learn to read by sounding out words. This approach is known as phonics. It goes way back, popularized in the 1800s with the McGuffey readers.

These two ideas - whole word and phonics - had been taking turns as the favored way to teach reading until Goodman came along with what came to be known among educators as the "three-cueing system."

In the cueing theory of how reading works, when a child comes to a word she doesn't know, the teacher encourages her to think of a word that makes sense and asks: Does it look right? Does it sound right? If a word checks out on the basis of those questions, the child is getting it. She's on the path to skilled reading.

Teachers may not know the term "three cueing," but they're probably familiar with "MSV." M stands for using meaning to figure out what a word is, S for using sentence structure and V for using visual information (i.e., the letters in the words). MSV is a cueing idea that can be traced back to the late Marie Clay, a developmental psychologist from New Zealand who first laid out her theories about reading in a dissertation in the 1960s. 6

Clay developed her cueing theory independently of Goodman, but they met several times and had similar ideas about the reading process. Their theories were based on observational research. They would listen to children read, note the kinds of errors they made, and use that information to identify a child's reading difficulties. For example, a child who says "horse" when the word was "house" is probably relying too much on visual, or graphic, cues. A teacher in this case would encourage the child to pay more attention to what word would make sense in the sentence.

Goodman and Clay believed that letters were the least reliable of the three cues, and that as people became better readers, they no longer needed to pay attention to all the letters in words. "In efficient word perception the reader relies mostly on the sentence and its meaning and some selected features of the forms of words," Clay wrote. 7 For Goodman, accurate word recognition was not necessarily the goal of reading. The goal was to comprehend text. 8 If the sentences were making sense, the reader must be getting the words right, or right enough.

These ideas soon became the foundation for how reading was taught in many schools. Goodman's three-cueing idea formed the theoretical basis of an approach known as "whole language" that by the late 1980s had taken hold throughout America. 9 Clay built her cueing ideas into a reading intervention program for struggling first-graders called Reading Recovery. It was implemented across New Zealand in the 1980s and went on to become one of the world's most widely used reading intervention programs. 10

But while cueing was taking hold in schools, scientists were busy studying the cognitive processes involved in reading words. And they came to different conclusions about how people read. 11

Scientists take on three cueing

It was the early 1970s, and Keith Stanovich was working on his doctorate in psychology at the University of Michigan. He thought the reading field was ready for an infusion of knowledge from the "cognitive revolution" that was underway in psychology. Stanovich had a background in experimental science and an interest in learning and cognition due in part to the influence of his wife, Paula, who was a special education teacher.

Stanovich wanted to understand how people read words. 12 He knew about Goodman's work and thought he was probably right that as people become better readers, they relied more on their knowledge of vocabulary and language structure to read words and didn't need to pay as much attention to the letters.

So, in 1975, Stanovich and a fellow graduate student set out to test the idea in their lab. They recruited readers of various ages and abilities and gave them a series of word-reading tasks. Their hypothesis was that skilled readers rely more on contextual cues to recognize words than poor readers, who probably weren't as good at using context.

They couldn't have been more wrong.

"To our surprise, all of our research results pointed in the opposite direction," Stanovich wrote. "It was the poorer readers, not the more skilled readers, who were more reliant on context to facilitate word recognition." 13

The skilled readers could instantly recognize words without relying on context. Other researchers have confirmed these findings with similar experiments. It turns out that the ability to read words in isolation quickly and accurately is the hallmark of being a skilled reader. This is now one of the most consistent and well-replicated findings in all of reading research. 14

Other studies revealed further problems with the cueing theory: 15

Skilled readers don't scan words and sample from the graphic cues in an incidental way; instead, they very quickly recognize a word as a sequence of letters. That's how good readers instantly know the difference between "house" and "horse," for example.

Experiments that force people to use context to predict words show that even skilled readers can correctly guess only a fraction of the words; this is one reason people who rely on context to identify words are poor readers.

Weak word recognition skills are the most common and debilitating source of reading problems. 16

The results of these studies are not controversial or contested among scientists who study reading. The findings have been incorporated into every major scientific model of how reading works.

But cueing is still alive and well in schools.

Picture Power!

It's not hard to find examples of the cueing system. A quick search on Google, Pinterest or Teachers Pay Teachers turns up plenty of lesson plans, teaching guides and classroom posters. One popular poster has cute cartoon characters to remind children they have lots of strategies to use when they're stuck on a word, including looking at the picture (Eagle Eye), getting their lips ready to try the first sound (Lips the Fish), or just skipping the word altogether (Skippy Frog).

There are videos online where you can see cueing in action. In one video posted on The Teaching Channel, 17 a kindergarten teacher in Oakland, California, instructs her students to use "picture power" to identify the words on the page. The goal of the lesson, according to the teacher, is for the students to "use the picture and a first sound to determine an unknown word in their book."

The class reads a book together called "In the Garden." On each page, there's a picture of something you might find in a garden. It's what's known as a predictable book; the sentences are all the same except for the last word.

The children have been taught to memorize the words "look," "at," and "the." The challenge is getting the last word in the sentence. The lesson plan tells the teacher to cover up the word with a sticky note.

In the video, the wiggly kindergarteners sitting cross-legged on the floor come to a page with a picture of a butterfly. The teacher tells the kids that she's guessing the word is going to be butterfly. She uncovers the word to check on the accuracy of her guess.

"Look at that," she tells the children, pointing to the first letter of the word. "It starts with the /b/ /b/ /b/." The class reads the sentence together as the teacher points to the words. "Look at the butterfly!" they yell out excitedly.

This lesson comes from "Units of Study for Teaching Reading," more commonly known as "reader's workshop." 18 According to the lesson plan, this lesson teaches children to "know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words." 19

But the children were not taught to decode words in this lesson. They were taught to guess words using pictures and patterns - hallmarks of the three-cueing system.

The author of Units of Study for Teaching Reading, Lucy Calkins, often refers to cueing in her published work. 20 She uses the term MSV - the meaning, structure and visual idea that originally came from Clay in New Zealand.

Then there is Fountas and Pinnell Literacy, started by Irene Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell, teachers who learned the MSV concept from Clay in the 1980s. 21

Fountas and Pinnell have written several books about teaching reading, including a best-seller about a widely used instructional approach called "Guided Reading." They also created a reading assessment system that uses what are called "leveled books." 22 Children start with predictable books like "In the Garden" and move up levels as they're able to "read" the words. But many of the words in those books - butterfly, caterpillar - are words that beginning readers haven't been taught to decode yet. One purpose of the books is to teach children that when they get to a word they don't know, they can use context to figure it out.

When put into practice in the classroom, these approaches can cause problems for children when they are learning to read.

'That is not reading'

Margaret Goldberg, a teacher and literacy coach in the Oakland Unified School District, remembers a moment when she realized what a problem the three-cueing approach was. She was with a first-grader named Rodney when he came to a page with a picture of a girl licking an ice cream cone and a dog licking a bone.

The text said: "My little dog likes to eat with me."

But Rodney said: "My dog likes to lick his bone."

Rodney breezed right through it, unaware that he hadn't read the sentence on the page.

Goldberg realized lots of her students couldn't actually read the words in their books; instead, they were memorizing sentence patterns and using the pictures to guess. One little boy exclaimed, "I can read this book with my eyes shut!"

"Oh no," Goldberg thought. "That is not reading."

Goldberg had been hired by the Oakland schools in 2015 to help struggling readers by teaching a Fountas and Pinnell program called "Leveled Literacy Intervention" that uses leveled books and the cueing approach. 23

Around the same time, Goldberg was trained in a program that uses a different strategy for teaching children how to read words. The program is called "Systematic Instruction in Phonological Awareness, Phonics, and Sight Words," or SIPPS. 24 It's a phonics program that teaches children how to sound out words and uses what are known as "decodable books." Most words in the books have spelling patterns that kids have been taught in their phonics lessons.

Goldberg decided to teach some of her students using the phonics program and some of her students using three cueing. And she began to notice differences between the two groups of kids. "Not just in their abilities to read," she said, "but in the way they approached their reading."

Goldberg and a colleague recorded first-graders talking about what makes them good readers.

One video shows Mia, on the left, who was in the phonics program. Mia says she's a good reader because she looks at the words and sounds them out. JaBrea, on the right, was taught the cueing system. JaBrea says: "I look at the pictures and I read it."

Courtesy of Margaret Goldberg, Oakland Unified School District

It was clear to Goldberg after just a few months of teaching both approaches that the students learning phonics were doing better. "One of the things that I still struggle with is a lot of guilt," she said.

She thinks the students who learned three cueing were actually harmed by the approach. "I did lasting damage to these kids. It was so hard to ever get them to stop looking at a picture to guess what a word would be. It was so hard to ever get them to slow down and sound a word out because they had had this experience of knowing that you predict what you read before you read it."

Goldberg soon discovered the decades of scientific evidence against cueing. 25 She was shocked. She had never come across any of this science in her teacher preparation or on the job.

And she started to wonder why not.

Balanced Literacy

People have been arguing for centuries about how children should be taught to read. The fight has mostly focused on whether to teach phonics.

The whole language movement of the late 20th century was perhaps the zenith of the anti-phonics argument. 26 Phonics instruction was seen as tedious, time-consuming and ultimately unnecessary. Why? Because - according to the three-cueing theory - readers can use other, more reliable cues to figure out what the words say. 27

Marilyn Adams came across this belief in the early 1990s. She's a cognitive and developmental psychologist who had just written a book summarizing the research on how children learn to read. 28 One big takeaway from the book is that becoming a skilled reader of English requires knowledge of sound-spelling correspondences. 29 Another big takeaway is that many kids were not being taught this in school.

Soon after the book was published, Adams was describing her findings to a group of teachers and state education officials in Sacramento, California. She was sensing discomfort and confusion in the room. "And I just stopped and said, 'What is it that I'm missing?'" she recalled. "'What is it that we need to talk about? Help me.'"

A woman raised her hand and asked: "What does this have to do with the three-cueing system?" Marilyn didn't know what the three-cueing system was. "I think I blew all of their fuses that I did not [know what it was] since this was so fundamental to being an elementary reading teacher," she said. "How could I present myself to them as an expert on reading and not know about this?"

The teachers drew her a Venn diagram of the three-cueing system. It looked something like this:

Adams thought this diagram made perfect sense. The research clearly shows that readers use all of these cues to understand what they're reading.

But Adams soon figured out the disconnect. Teachers understood these cues not just as the way readers construct meaning from text, but as the way readers actually identify the words on the page. And they thought that teaching kids to decode or sound out words was not necessary.

"The most important thing was for the children to understand and enjoy the text," Adams said. "And from that understanding and joy of reading, the words on the page would just pop out at them."

She would explain to teachers at every opportunity that explicitly teaching children about the relationships between sounds and letters is essential to ensure all kids get off to a good start in reading. But she got tons of pushback from teachers. "They didn't want to teach phonics!" she recalled in frustration.

In 1998, Adams wrote a book chapter about how the three-cueing system conflicts with what researchers have figured out about reading. She hoped it would help put three cueing to rest. 30

By this time, the scientific research on reading was gaining traction. In 2000, a national panel convened by Congress to review the evidence on how to teach reading came out with a report. 31 It identified several essential components of reading instruction, including vocabulary, comprehension and phonics. The evidence that phonics instruction enhances children's success in learning how to read was clear and compelling. National reports on reading a few years later in the United Kingdom and Australia came to the same conclusion. 32

"When I got into the classroom and someone told me to use this practice, I didn't question it."-Stacey Cherny

Eventually, many whole language supporters accepted the weight of the scientific evidence about the importance of phonics instruction. They started adding phonics to their books and materials and renamed their approach "balanced literacy."

But they didn't get rid of the three-cueing system.

Balanced literacy proponents will tell you their approach is a mix of phonics instruction with plenty of time for kids to read and enjoy books. But look carefully at the materials and you'll see that's not really what balanced literacy is mixing. Instead, it's mixing a bunch of different ideas about how kids learn to read. It's a little bit of whole word instruction with long lists of words for kids to memorize. It's a little bit of phonics. And fundamentally, it's the idea that children should be taught to read using the three-cueing system.

And it turns out cueing may actually prevent kids from focusing on words in the way they need to become skilled readers.

Mapping the words

To understand why cueing can get in the way of children's reading development, it's essential to understand how our brains process the words we see.

Reading scientists have known for decades that the hallmark of being a skilled reader is the ability to instantly and accurately recognize words. 33 If you're a skilled reader, your brain has gotten so good at reading words that you process the word "chair" faster than you process a picture of a chair. 34 You know tens of thousands of words instantly, on sight. How did you learn to do that?

It happens through a process called "orthographic mapping." 35 This occurs when you pay attention to the details of a written word and link the word's pronunciation and meaning with its sequence of letters. 36 A child knows the meaning and pronunciation of "pony." The word gets mapped to his memory when he links the sounds /p/ /o/ /n/ /y/ to the written word "pony."

That requires an awareness of the speech sounds in words and an understanding of how those sounds are represented by letters. 37 In other words, you need phonics skills.

Here's what happens when a reader who has good phonics skills comes to a word she doesn't recognize in print. She stops at the word and sounds it out. If it's a word she knows the meaning of, she has now linked the spelling of the word with its pronunciation. If she doesn't know the meaning of the word, she can use context to try to figure it out.

By about second grade, a typically developing reader needs just a few exposures to a word through understanding both the pronunciation and the spelling for that word to be stored in her memory. 38 She doesn't know that word because she memorized it as a visual image. She knows that word because at some point she successfully sounded it out.

The more words she stores in her memory this way, the more she can focus on the meaning of what she's reading; she'll eventually be using less brain power to identify words and will be able to devote more brain power to comprehending what she's reading. 39

But when children don't have good phonics skills, the process is different.

"They sample from the letters because they're not good at sounding them out," said David Kilpatrick, a psychology professor at SUNY Cortland and the author of a book about preventing reading difficulties. 40 "And they use context."

In other words, when people don't have good phonics skills, they use the cueing system.

"The three-cueing system is the way poor readers read," said Kilpatrick.

And if teachers use the cueing system to teach reading, Kilpatrick says they're not just teaching children the habits of poor readers, they are actually impeding the orthographic mapping process. 41

"The minute you ask them just to pay attention to the first letter or look at the picture, look at the context, you're drawing their attention away from the very thing that they need to interact with in order for them to read the word [and] remember the word," Kilpatrick said. In this way, he said, three cueing can actually prevent the critical learning that's necessary for a child to become a skilled reader.

In many balanced literacy classrooms, children are taught phonics and the cueing system. Some kids who are taught both approaches realize pretty quickly that sounding out a word is the most efficient and reliable way to know what it is. Those kids tend to have an easier time understanding the ways that sounds and letters relate. They'll drop the cueing strategies and begin building that big bank of instantly known words that is so necessary for skilled reading.

But some children will skip the sounding out if they're taught they have other options. Phonics is challenging for many kids. The cueing strategies seem quicker and easier at first. And by using context and memorizing a bunch of words, many children can look like good readers - until they get to about third grade, when their books begin to have more words, longer words, and fewer pictures. Then they're stuck. They haven't developed their sounding-out skills. Their bank of known words is limited. Reading is slow and laborious and they don't like it, so they don't do it if they don't have to. While their peers who mastered decoding early are reading and teaching themselves new words every day, the kids who clung to the cueing approach are falling further and further behind. 42

These poor reading habits, once ingrained at a young age, can follow kids into high school. Some kids who were taught the cueing approach never become good readers. Not because they're incapable of learning to read well but because they were taught the strategies of struggling readers.

'So what if they use the picture?'

Once Margaret Goldberg discovered the cognitive science evidence against cueing, she wanted her colleagues in the Oakland school district to know about it too.

Over the past two years, Goldberg and a fellow literacy coach named Lani Mednick have been leading a grant-funded pilot project to improve reading achievement in the Oakland schools. 43

They have their work cut out for them. Nearly half the district's third-graders are below grade level in reading. Goldberg and Mednick want to raise questions about how kids in Oakland are being taught to read.

They meet every couple weeks with literacy coaches from the 10 elementary schools in the pilot program. They read and discuss articles about the scientific research on reading. At a meeting in March, the coaches watched the video of the "picture power" lesson.

"This teacher meant well," Mednick said to the coaches after they watched the lesson. "It seemed like she believed this lesson would ensure her students would be on the road toward reading."

Mednick wanted the coaches to consider the beliefs about reading that would lead to the creation of a lesson like "picture power." The Oakland schools purchased the Units of Study for Teaching Reading series, which includes the "picture power" lesson, as part of a balanced literacy initiative the district began about 10 years ago. The district also bought the Fountas and Pinnell assessment system.

The coaches saw right away that "picture power" was designed to teach kids the cueing system. But they said many teachers don't see any problem with cueing. After all, one of the cues is to look at the letters in the word. What's wrong with teaching kids lots of different strategies to figure out unknown words? 44

"I remember before we started looking at the science and everything, I thought to myself, 'Reading is so hard for kids, so what if they use the picture?'" said Soraya Sajous-Brooks, the early literacy coach at Prescott Elementary School in West Oakland. "Like, use everything you've got."

But she's come to understand that cueing sends the message to kids that they don't need to sound out words. Her students would get phonics instruction in one part of the day. Then they'd go reader's workshop and be taught that when they come to a word they don't know, they have lots of strategies. They can sound it out. They can also check the first letter, look at the picture, think of a word that makes sense.

Teaching cueing and phonics doesn't work, Sajous-Brooks said. "One negates the other."

Goldberg and Mednick want to show the district there's a better way to teach reading. Schools in the pilot project used grant money to buy new materials that steer clear of the three-cueing idea. Two charter school networks in Oakland are working on similar projects to move their schools away from cueing.

To see what it looks like, I visited a first-grade classroom at a charter school in Oakland called Achieve Academy. 45

One part of the day was explicit phonics instruction. 46 The students were divided into small groups based on their skill level. They met with their teacher, Andrea Ruiz, at a kidney-shaped table in a corner of the classroom. The lowest-level group worked on identifying the speech sounds in words like "skin" and "skip." The highest-level group learned how verbs like "spy" and "cry" are spelled as "spied' and 'cried" in the past tense.

There were also vocabulary lessons. 47 The entire class gathered on a rug at the front of the classroom to talk about a book Ms. Ruiz read out loud to them. One of the words in the book was "prey."

"What animals are a chameleon's prey?" Ms. Ruiz asked the children. "Or we can also ask, what animals do chameleons hunt for food?"

The kids turned and talked to each other. "A chameleon's prey are bugs and insects and other chameleons and mice and birds," a little boy explained to his classmate. "That's it."

Other vocabulary words these first-graders had learned were posted on cards around the classroom. They included: wander, persevere, squint and scrumptious. The kids weren't expected to read those words yet. The idea is to build their oral vocabulary so that when they can read those words, they know what the words mean.

This comes straight from the scientific research, which shows that reading comprehension is the product of two things. 48 First, a child needs to be able to sound out a word. Second, the child needs to know the meaning of the word she just sounded out. So, in a first-grade classroom that's following the research, you will see explicit phonics instruction and also lessons that build oral vocabulary and background knowledge. And you will see kids practicing what they've been taught.

After their vocabulary lesson, the kids did "buddy reading." They retreated to various spots around the classroom to read books to each other. I found Belinda sitting on an adult chair at the back of the classroom, her little legs swinging. Across from her was her buddy Steven, decked out in a yellow and blue plaid shirt tucked neatly into his jeans. He held the book and pointed to the words while Belinda read.

"Ellen /m/," Belinda paused, sounding out the word "meets." She was reading a decodable book about some kids who visit a farm. Almost all of the words in the book contain spelling patterns she'd been taught in her phonics lessons.

"I am a farm here," Belinda read.

Steven did a double-take. "A farmer here," he said gently. Steven's job as Belinda's reading buddy was to help her if she missed a word or got stuck. But that didn't happen much because Belinda had been taught how to read the words. She didn't need any help from the pictures, either. She barely glanced at them as she read.

To be clear, there's nothing wrong with pictures. They're great to look at and talk about, and they can help a child comprehend the meaning of a story. Context - including a picture if there is one - helps us understand what we're reading all the time. But if a child is being taught to use context to identify words, she's being taught to read like a poor reader.

Many educators don't know this because the cognitive science research has not made its way into many schools and schools of education. 49

Ruiz didn't know about this research until the Oakland pilot project. "I didn't really know anything about how kids learn to read when I started teaching," she said. It was a relief when she came to Oakland and the curriculum spelled out that kids use meaning, structure and visual cues to figure out words. "Because I came from not having anything, I was like, 'Oh, there's a way we should teach this,'" she said.

I heard this from other educators. Cueing was appealing because they didn't know what else to do.

"When I got into the classroom and someone told me to use this practice, I didn't question it," said Stacey Cherny, a former teacher who's now principal of an elementary school in Pennsylvania. She says many teachers aren't taught what they need to know about the structure of the English language to be able to teach phonics well. She says phonics can be intimidating; three cueing isn't.

Another reason cueing holds on is that it seems to work for some children. But researchers estimate there's a percentage of kids - perhaps about 40 percent - who will learn to read no matter how they're taught. 50 According to Kilpatrick, children who learn to read with cueing are succeeding in spite of the instruction, not because of it.

Goldberg hopes the pilot project in Oakland will convince the district to drop all instructional materials that include cueing.

When asked about this, the Oakland superintendent's office responded with a written statement that there isn't enough evidence from the pilot project to make curriculum changes for the entire district and that the Oakland schools remain committed to balanced literacy.

Oakland's situation is no different from many other districts across the country that have invested millions of dollars in materials that include cueing.

"It feels like everyone's trusting somebody else to have done their due diligence," Goldberg said. "Classroom teachers are trusting that the materials they're being handed will work. The people who purchase the materials are trusting if they were on the market, that they will work. We're all trusting, and it's a system that is broken."

'My science is different'

If cueing was debunked decades ago by cognitive scientists, why is the idea still in materials that are being sold to schools?

One answer to that question is that school districts still buy the materials. Heinemann, the company that publishes the Fountas and Pinnell and Lucy Calkins' products that the Oakland schools use, earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 million in 2018, according to earnings reports. 51

I wanted to know what the authors of those materials make of the cognitive science research. And I wanted to give them a chance to explain the ideas behind their work. I wrote to Calkins, Fountas and Pinnell and asked for interviews. They all declined. Heinemann sent a statement that said every product the company sells is informed by extensive research.

I also asked Ken Goodman for an interview. It's been more than 50 years since he first laid out the three-cueing theory in that 1967 paper. I wanted to know what he thinks of the cognitive science research. Of the major proponents of three cueing I reached out to, he was the only one who agreed to an interview.

I visited Goodman at his home in Tucson, Arizona. He's 91. He uses a scooter to get around, but he's still working. He just finished a new edition of one of his books.

When I asked him what he makes of the cognitive science research, he told me he thinks scientists focus too much on word recognition. He still doesn't believe accurate word recognition is necessary for reading comprehension.

"Word recognition is a preoccupation," he said. "I don't teach word recognition. I teach people to make sense of language. And learning the words is incidental to that."

He brought up the example of a child who comes to the word "horse" and says "pony" instead. His argument is that a child will still understand the meaning of the story because horse and pony are the same concept.

I pressed him on this. First of all, a pony isn't the same thing as a horse. Second, don't you want to make sure that when a child is learning to read, he understands that /p/ /o/ /n/ /y/ says "pony"? And different letters say "horse"?

He dismissed my question.

"The purpose is not to learn words," he said. "The purpose is to make sense."

Cognitive scientists don't dispute that the purpose of reading is to make sense of the text. But the question is: How can you understand what you are reading if you can't accurately read the words? And if quick and accurate word recognition is the hallmark of being a skilled reader, how does a little kid get there?

Goodman rejected the idea that you can make a distinction between skilled readers and unskilled readers; he doesn't like the value judgment that implies. He said dyslexia does not exist - despite lots of evidence that it does. 52 And he said the three-cueing theory is based on years of observational research. In his view, three cueing is perfectly valid, drawn from a different kind of evidence than what scientists collect in their labs.

"My science is different," Goodman said.

This idea that there are different kinds of evidence that lead to different conclusions about how reading works is one reason people continue to disagree about how children should be taught to read. It's important for educators to understand that three cueing is based on theory and observational research and that there's decades of scientific evidence from labs all over the world that converges on a very different idea about skilled reading.

The cognitive science does not provide all the answers about how to teach children to read, but on the question of how skilled readers read words, scientists have amassed a huge body of evidence.

Goldberg thinks it's time for educators across the country to take a close look at all the materials they use to teach reading.

"We should look through the materials and search for evidence of cueing," she said. "And if it's there, don't touch it. Don't let it get near our kids, don't let it get near our classrooms, our teachers."

Share and discuss on Facebook
Support for this program comes from the Spencer Foundation and Lumina Foundation.
Sign up for email notifications
We're interested in hearing what impact APM Reports programs have on you. Has one of our documentaries or podcasts changed how you think about an issue? Has it led you to do something, like start a conversation or try to do something new in your community? Share your impact story.

Enter your address below and we'll let you know when we publish new stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How a flawed idea is teaching millions of kids to be poor readers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For decades, schools have taught children the strategies of struggling readers, using a theory about reading that cognitive scientists have repeatedly debunked. And many teachers and parents don't know there's anything wrong with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientific research has shown how children learn to read and how they should be taught. But many educators don’t know the science and, in some cases, actively resist it. As a result, millions of kids are being set up to fail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sound Walls 101 - Connecting Phonemes to Graphemes by Michelle Trostle | This newsletter was created with Smore, an online tool for creating beautiful newsletters for individual educators, schools and districts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sound walls are becoming more common in classrooms thanks to a clearer understanding of the science of reading.

A quick search on Teachers Pay Teachers shows there is a demand for materials for sound walls, but not all the information out there is accurate. While well-intentioned, we need to understand why a sound wall is set up differently than an A-Z alphabetical word wall and how to use a sound wall effectively. The goal is to elevate daily instruction during Tier 1 by reviewing the 44 speech sounds and the options for spelling each of the sounds. By doing this daily review, it becomes automatic for students to access sounds and know how to match spelling to each sound. A confusion between letters and sounds still exists on the part of the teacher in many situations. For example, the silent letter grapheme represents the /n/. (When you see the diagonal lines with a letter in between, this represents the sound.)

Our goal is to help you transform word walls into sound walls. Many practices are being used with word walls that we can adjust to use with sound walls. Following is some advice for teachers making the change from a word wall to sound wall. These tips can be used to guide the explanation of how to set up a sound wall.

Step 1:

We begin with the speech sounds and then add the print. Phonemes can be classified by articulatory features that have to do with placement in the mouth, airflow, and voicing. Begin by talking about how your lips come together when saying the /p/. Notice what happens with your tongue when you say /l/, it is lifted in the top of your mouth behind your teeth. There is also a vibration when saying /l/, and we call that voicing. During a two- to three-week period, introduce all of the 44 speech sounds by the articulatory features.

Don't confuse this with all of the spellings of the sounds. By introducing each phoneme, you are giving students an organizational structure to understand the foundation of our language. Even in kindergarten, you are asking children to blend and segment words with all of the speech sounds. Segment the sounds in book, /b/ /oo/ /k/. You wouldn't teach students to read with /oo/, but they use the sound in their speech all of the time. Why not teach the sound explicitly and discuss how we make that sound, what it looks like, and feels like? Once the sound is obvious, it will be much easier to attach the different graphemes for reading and spelling.

Step 2: Attach a keyword to help students remember the sound.

It is unnecessary to print words on different colored paper or outline the shape of a word. Please do not do those things that distract from learning about phonemes (sounds) and graphemes (print).

Once a sound is introduced, teach the most common letter or grapheme that represents the sound. For example, after introducing /p/ teach them that is the most common spelling for that sound. This is easy initially in kindergarten but becomes more complex in first grade because children have to learn about digraphs and vowel teams that are used to spell many sounds.

Step 3: Daily review and discuss all of the sounds that have been introduced.

What are the six stop sounds? /p/, /b/, /t/, /d/, /k/, /g/

What are our vowel sounds? Ask children to repeat each vowel sound as you point to either a picture of a mouth forming that sound or a keyword that represents the sound. Find the / ā/, and what are the spellings we know for this sound? Commons spellings for / ā/ ai, ay, a_e, and a. These will be the most common spellings used in first grade. Use this information to help students attend to sounds as you are segmenting and blending words during your phonemic awareness practice. As they focus on phonemes during their phonological awareness exercises, this connection between speech and print is enhanced and elevates the understanding of how the two work together.

Step 4: Engage in activities using the sound wall.

Identify the distinguishing features of voiced and voiceless consonant phonemes; orally produce individual consonant phonemes after correct teacher modeling of the voicing distinction: /p//b/; /k//g/; /t/ /d/; /f/ /v/; /sh/ /zh/; /th/ /th/; /ch//j/; /s/ /z/

Explore the way related groups of phonemes are pronounced: stops /p/, /b/, /t/,/d/,/k/, /g/; hissy sounds /f/, /v/, /th/, /th/, /s/, /z/,/sh/; nasals /m/, /n/,

/ng/; glides /h/, /w/, /wh/, /y/; and liquids/l/ and /r/.

Play the speech-sound guessing game. Students imitate the sounds and/or look in a mirror to answer questions such as, which sound is made with the lips-/p/ or /k/? Which sound is made with the mouth wide open-/ŏ/ or /w/? Which sound is made with the tongue between the teeth-/f/ or /th/?

Say /b/, /b/, /b/, and then try saying the same sound with your lips together and popping the air out with your voice on. Now, keep doing the same thing with your lips and your breath but turn your voice off. What sound? /p/ /p/ /p/.

Do a picture sort with /p/ and /b/. In this classroom, the teacher has the students working with the confusing sounds /p/ and /b/ which are only differentiated by voicing.

Step 5: Use the sound wall for independent learning by problem solving.

When a student asks how to spell " meet," ask them to find the /ē/ and look at the choices for spelling that sound. This is much more efficient than asking them if they can find a word that sounds like or rhymes with " meet." By using a sound wall and connecting directly to the graphemes, students have much quicker access to mapping speech to print.

If a student stumbles on the word like " night" while reading, point out the and direct them to the long card on the sound wall. What do we know about this spelling and the sound it represents?

Let's keep this conversation going. Please add your comments and questions below so we can add to the understanding of sound walls at work in a classroom.

Listen to Mary's podcast about the importance of Sound Walls here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Implementing a Sound Wall: Because We Need to Distinguish Between Sounds and Letters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sound walls are becoming more common in classrooms thanks to a clearer understanding of the science of reading. We need to understand why a sound wall is set up differently than an A-Z alphabetical word wall and how to use a sound wall effectively to elevate daily instruction during Tier 1 by reviewing the 44 speech sounds and the options for spelling each of the sounds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Aouad, J. and Savage, R. (2009). The component structure of preliteracy skills: Further evidence for the simple view of reading. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 24 (2), 183-200.

Catts, H., Adlof, S., and Weismer, S. (2006). Language deficits in poor comprehenders: A case for the simple view of reading. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 278-293.

Gough, P., Hoover, W., and Patterson, C. (1996). Some observations on a simple view of reading. In C. Cornoldi and J. Oakhill (eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention (pp. 1-13). Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

*Gough, P. and Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10.

Hoover, W. and Gough, P. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127-160.

*Kamhi, A. (2007). Knowledge deficits: the true crisis in education. ASHA Leader, 12 (7), 28-29.

*These articles are short and easy to read.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Simple View of Reading is a formula demonstrating the widely accepted view that reading has two basic components: word recognition (decoding) and language comprehension. Research studies show that a student's reading comprehension score can be predicted if decoding skills and language comprehension abilities are known.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning to Read: “The Simple View of Reading”

# data[].attributes.headline
The Reading Rope: Thinking About Comprehension

# data[].attributes.subject
The Reading Rope: Thinking About Comprehension

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SST3 Literacy - The Four-Part Processing Model

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Four Part Processing Model for Word Recognition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
R.I.S.E Arkansas Science of Reading Resources - The Four Part Processor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Four-Part Processing Model for word recognition is a simplified model that illustrates how the brain reads or recognizes words. There are four processors that are active in the reading brain - phonological, orthographic, meaning, and context processors (Moats & Tolman, 2019). Instruction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leaders & Learning in Literacy: The Tolman Hour Glass

# data[].attributes.headline
Transitioning from Word Walls to Sound Walls

# data[].attributes.subject
Transitioning from Word Walls to Sound Walls

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Transitioning from Word Walls to Sound Walls

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sound walls support students with learning those tricky high-frequency words. They also support students in retaining and learning to read unfamiliar words on their own. A sound wall does the work of matching our articulation of speech sounds/phonemes to the letters/graphemes that represent those so…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This post is the first in a two part series on using sound walls in the classroom. Here I share general information about phoneme sound walls, discuss how a sound wall is different from a word wall and how sound walls help students learn to read, write and spell.
Sound walls.... It's likely your literacy coach has mentioned them, you've seen talk of them on social media, or you may even have a colleague who has started using one! Maybe you're curious about sound walls but unsure where to start, or you know a bit about them but are nervous to ditch the comfort of your word wall to try something totally new!

I understand! Change can be hard! But I think once you get to know more about sound walls and the value they bring, you'll see it's a change worth making!

To help you out I've decided to create a two-part blog series all about sound walls. In this first post, I'll share general information about sound walls, discuss their benefits, and how they are different from word walls. The second post will focus on how to set up and use a sound wall in your classroom. I hope you'll find it all to be useful info that will help you get more comfortable with the idea of using a sound wall in your classroom!

So without further ado....

What is a Sound Wall?

A is a way to organize and display the different sounds (or phonemes) we hear in speech. Similar to a word wall, a sound wall is a place for students to reference when they are spelling and reading words. But UNLIKE a traditional A-Z word wall (where words are grouped by their beginning letter), words on a sound wall are grouped by their sounds.

Because sounds cannot be written, we use letters to represent the sounds. A grapheme is the written representation of one phoneme, or sound. A sound wall matches our speech sounds (phonemes) to the letters (graphemes) that represent those sounds.

When you see a sound wall you will often find pictures of mouths next to each sound. This helps students better understand what their tongue and mouth are doing when they produce a sound and encourages them to pay attention to the way their mouth feels, looks and acts when they produce different sounds. Mouth pictures are a great support to help students connect the sounds they hear with the print that represents them.

There are usually two parts of a sound wall - a consonant sound wall and a vowel sound wall. They're organized separately and in different ways. Let's talk about the consonants first...

Consonant Sound Walls

A consonant sound wall is organized by the manner of articulation (how the sound is being formed) and the place of articulation (wherein the mouth a sound is occurring).

There are five major categories of consonants based on the manner of articulation. In his book Phonics from A to Z, Wiley Blevins describes the categories as:

1. Stops: formed by closing or blocking off the airflow and then exploding a puff of air. Place your hand in front of your mouth and produce the sounds /b/, /p/, /d/, /t/, /g/, /k/. Do you feel the burst of air? These are stops.

2. Fricatives: formed by narrowing the air channel and then forcing air through it which creates friction in the mouth. /f/, /v/, /th/, /z/, /s/, /zh/, and /sh/ are fricatives. Affricative is a subgroup of fricatives. It is a sound produced by the sequence of a stop followed by a fricative. Examples of affricatives include /ch/ and /j/.

3. Nasals: formed when the mouth is closed, forcing the air through the nose. /m/, /n/, /ng/ are nasals.

4. Liquids: formed by interrupting the airflow slighting, but no friction results. /r/ and /l/ and liquids.

5. Glides: sometimes called semivowels because they are formed in similar ways as vowels. /w/, /y/, /h/ glides.

Finally, consonants can also be grouped as voiced or unvoiced. When you produce a voiced sound, your vocal cords vibrate. An unvoiced sound produces no vibration.

I realize it can be really hard to fully understand and envision all this info about sound categories just by reading about them.

This video does a great job providing more clear examples and explanations of each one. It's worth taking a look for a deeper, more clear understanding!

Vowel Sound Walls

A vowel sound wall looks different than a consonant one. It is organized by the place of articulation. It is visually represented in the shape of a V or a valley to mimic the change in position of our mouths and shift in our jaw when we produce the different the vowel sounds. When we make the first vowel sound, /e/ our chin starts very high, and as we move down the v, our chin lowers.

Then there are some vowel sounds that are outliers and aren't placed along the "vowel valley". Outside the valley you should also include /oi/ and /ou/, as well as the r-controlled vowels (ar, or, ur, and ir).

Check out this video for more information about the vowel sound walls. It really helped me envision what it looks like and how I would use it in my classroom.

Additionally, this video does a great job showing the differences in the position of the teeth, tongue and lips for each sound category. I think it is helpful for both teachers and students!

The Benefits of a Sound Wall

The more I read and learn about sound walls, the more they make sense to me. Here are a few of the main benefits I see to using a sound wall in the classroom:

- Sound walls are based on the science of reading! Research tells us that readers make the connection between print patterns and phonological information that is already stored in the brain in order to then make meaning of the word they're reading ( Moats, 2010). This is why explicitly teaching phonemes is necessary before you teach sound-letter correspondence.

- Sound walls approach things from the learners point of view. On a traditional A-Z word wall, words are categorized by the first letter. But that doesn't make sense to someone who is just learning to spell! A student looking for the word phone will not naturally look to P. Putting the word knee under K is confusing to them! A sound wall categorizes words by their sounds which makes much more sense to the learner!

- They allow for explicit instruction of phonemes. Kids learn to talk well before they learn to read or write. This is because the human brain is hardwired for oral language, but not for reading and writing. Students need direct and explicit instruction on how to read, write, and spell. A sound wall is a tool that allows for this valuable, explicit phonics instruction.

Do you use a sound wall in your classroom? What benefits do you see to using one?

I hope the information I've shared today helps you to better understand sound walls and why they are such a great resource for helping students read and write. Be on the lookout for my next post where I'll share all about getting a sound wall set-up in your classroom!
PIN for LATER

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is a Sound Wall and Why Should You Use One in Your Classroom?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This post is the first in a two part series on using sound walls in the classroom. Here I share general information about phoneme sound walls, discuss how a sound wall is different from a word wall and how sound walls help students learn to read, write and spell. Sound walls....

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1u4qI1Dn4um1eQ_LUlxGN2z1WEVJ_ytthLV9ipYuHSEs/mobilepresent?slide=id.g8f66bd8c35_0_0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share This:

By Louise Spear-Swerling, PhD

Recently the topic of Structured Literacy teaching has sparked considerable interest. Educators and parents often have questions about this approach:

What does it involve?

How is it different from the ways that children are usually taught to read?

Why is it effective for children with dyslexia and other learning difficulties?

Here is an explanation of what structured literacy means and why schools should use it.
What Is Structured Literacy?
Structured literacy (SL) approaches emphasize highly explicit and systematic teaching of all important components of literacy. These components include both foundational skills (e.g., decoding, spelling) and higher-level literacy skills (e.g., reading comprehension, written expression). SL also emphasizes oral language abilities essential to literacy development, including phonemic awareness, sensitivity to speech sounds in oral language, and the ability to manipulate those sounds.

Explicit teaching means that teachers clearly explain and model key skills; they do not expect children to infer these skills only from exposure. Systematic means that there is a well-organized sequence of instruction, with important prerequisite skills taught before more advanced skills. For instance, children master decoding and spelling simpler consonant-vowel-consonant words (e.g., tap) with short vowel sounds before learning more complex short-vowel words (e.g., stamp or tapped) with consonant blends or affixes.

Explicit, systematic teaching requires teacher-led instruction. Teacher-led instruction also enables educators to provide prompt, targeted feedback in response to children's mistakes, another characteristic of SL. For example, suppose that children are practicing reading words with short vowel sounds and consonant blends (e.g., stamp) aloud, and a child misreads stamp as stump. Rather than just telling the child the word, the teacher might point to the vowel to draw the child's attention to it. If that cue did not help, the teacher would provide additional feedback focused on the child's specific error (e.g., "short sound for a is pronounced /ă/ ").

...the emphasis is on patterns rather than specific words. This is because the teacher is trying to foster a decoding (and encoding) process or strategy-instead of teaching children to memorize individual words by overall visual appearance.

Structured literacy approaches use books and other instructional materials that lend themselves to this kind of teaching. Educators teach from a sequence of phonics materials proceeding from use of simpler to more complex patterns. Children read books containing the phonics word patterns they have been taught. Reading of texts and phonics instruction are coordinated so that as children's decoding skills develop, they are able to read increasingly complex texts. Similarly, spelling is coordinated with decoding, so that each reinforces the other.

Here is an example of coordination of decoding and spelling. Suppose that beginning decoders are learning to decode simple consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) words such as tap, win, or fit. Their spelling instruction would employ similar CVC word patterns, such as nag, sip, and hat. Notice that the emphasis is on patterns rather than specific words. This is because the teacher is trying to foster a decoding (and encoding) process or strategy-instead of teaching children to memorize individual words by overall visual appearance.

Figure 1 provides one example of a structured literacy activity for decoding and spelling, a phoneme-grapheme mapping task. The teacher dictates a chain of patterned words for children to spell in a grid, one word at a time, with one phoneme (speech sound) per box. (For decoding, the teacher can write the words and have children decode them.) The chain involves a variety of single-phoneme changes in words, not just changes in the first phoneme (spelling) or grapheme (decoding).

Words in the chain are carefully chosen. All are phonetically regular and involve only letter-sound (grapheme-phoneme) relationships children have been taught. For example, in the second row of the grid, tar would not be an appropriate choice to follow tap, because tar contains a vowel- r pattern ( ar) with a different vowel sound that children have not been taught at this early stage.

This SL activity and other similar activities promote careful attention to all the letters in a word-and all the phonemes they represent. They help children to grasp the alphabetic principle-the idea that reading involves a code in which sounds in spoken words map onto letters (graphemes) in printed words-as well as to develop strong phonemic awareness, decoding, and spelling skills.

They help children to grasp the alphabetic principle-the idea that reading involves a code in which sounds in spoken words map onto letters (graphemes) in printed words-as well as to develop strong phonemic awareness, decoding, and spelling skills.

A number of instructional programs and approaches have the features of SL. There is not one "best" SL approach for all children with dyslexia or other learning problems. Still, some instructional approaches and materials are simply incompatible with SL. Unfortunately, many of these are widely used in schools.
How Is Literacy Usually Taught?
Literacy instruction in many schools is not highly explicit or systematic. Important foundational skills (e.g., phonemic awareness and decoding) often receive limited emphasis, even for beginners or struggling decoders (Moats, 2017).

Literacy instruction in many schools is not highly explicit or systematic. Important foundational skills (e.g., phonemic awareness and decoding) often receive limited emphasis, even for beginners or struggling decoders (Moats, 2017).

Typical literacy instruction frequently uses loosely structured types of approaches, such as "reader's workshop" or "writer's workshop." Considerable classroom time is spent having children work independently on reading and writing tasks of their own choosing. Teachers do supervise this work and spend time "conferencing" with individual children. However, the way that instruction is organized means that time for teacher-led, explicit instruction is minimal.

Another key problem is that commonly used instructional materials do not lend themselves to explicit, systematic teaching of important foundational components of literacy. These problems may undermine the effectiveness even of a highly capable teacher.

For example, many schools do not provide teachers with a systematic phonics program and accompanying sets of words, texts, and materials. It is very difficult to teach phonics well, especially to large groups of children or those who struggle, without appropriate instructional materials.

Many schools do not provide teachers with a systematic phonics program and accompanying sets of words, texts, and materials. It is very difficult to teach phonics well, especially to large groups of children or those who struggle, without appropriate instructional materials.

Instead, teachers may be told to post "word walls" in the classroom; these "word walls" often contain common words that vary greatly in spelling patterns and pronunciation. (See Figure 2.) Some words (e.g., are, again) are irregular (i.e., exceptions to phonics generalizations). Other words are regular, but involve a wide range of patterns, including some difficult ones for beginners (e.g., two-syllable words like better). These kinds of materials do not help children understand the predictability of phonics patterns in words. Instead, they encourage memorization of whole words, a strategy that will not help children learn to read well in the long run.
More About Phonics in Typical Literacy Instruction
A frequent response from schools using typical literacy practices is, "But we do teach phonics!" This is generally true. However, in addition to limited emphasis and lack of explicitness, there are other problems with phonics instruction in many schools.

Research over the past couple of decades has suggested that, although any phonics is better than no phonics at all, certain types of phonics approaches are more effective than others. Specifically, an initial phoneme-grapheme level approach-that is characteristic of structured literacy-is more effective than a larger-unit phonics approach such as onset-rime, analytic phonics, or word families. (See Brady, 2011, for a review.) Typical literacy instruction often favors a larger unit approach to phonics.

Following are examples of how different phonics approaches might teach children to decode an unfamiliar word such as stack:

In a word families approach, children would learn to decode stack by comparing it to a known word such as back.

In an onset-rime approach, children would learn the sound for two parts of the word, the onset (st→/st/) and the rime (-ack→/ăk/). They would then blend the two parts to form the word (/st/) →/ăk/)→/stack/).

In a phoneme-grapheme level approach, children would learn sounds for the graphemes that represent each phoneme (s→/s/ t→/t/ a→/ă/and ck→/k/), then how to blend all four parts into a whole word (/s/ /t//ă/ /k/ →/stack/.

Research over the past couple of decades has suggested that, although any phonics is better than no phonics at all, certain types of phonics approaches are more effective than others. Specifically, an initial phoneme-grapheme level approach-that is characteristic of structured literacy-is more effective than a larger-unit phonics approach such as onset-rime, analytic phonics, or word families. (See Brady, 2011, for a review.) Typical literacy instruction often favors a larger unit approach to phonics.

Why is an initial phoneme-grapheme level phonics approach generally preferable to other phonics approaches? One reason may be that the phoneme-grapheme approach promotes closer attention to spelling (grapheme) and speech sound (phoneme) sequences in words than do other phonics approaches. Careful attention to letter sequences in words is fundamental for developing good decoding skills. Also, this approach generally includes explicit teaching of phoneme segmentation and blending, important phonemic awareness skills-foundational skills for both spelling and decoding.

In a phoneme-grapheme level approach, children would eventually learn to attend to larger patterns in words, including common orthographic patterns, such as graphemes (e.g., ar, ee, au, igh) and morphemes (e.g., common roots/base elements, prefixes, and suffixes). Some very common morphemes (e.g., ​-ing, ​-ed​ [​​indicating tense​]​) often would be taught relatively early. However, an emphasis on larger units mostly comes later, as children advance to more complex words, rather than at the very beginning of phonics teaching. Furthermore, all of these elements-phonemes, graphemes, and morphemes-would be taught in an explicit, systematic way.

In addition to basic phonics instruction, children need to practice applying their phonics skills while reading texts (Foorman et al., 2016). While their decoding is still developing-and particularly for children who struggle with decoding-oral reading of texts with teacher guidance and feedback is essential. Texts should include many words that children can decode. Otherwise, children may just guess at words.

In addition to basic phonics instruction, children need to practice applying their phonics skills while reading texts (Foorman et al., 2016). While their decoding is still developing-and particularly for children who struggle with decoding-oral reading of texts with teacher guidance and feedback is essential.

Unfortunately, in typical literacy instruction, children often read leveled or predictable texts. These texts use many words that poor decoders cannot read, with pictures that usually encourage guessing.

For instance, a predictable text about a child getting ready to go to school in the morning might have sentences such as William found his lunch, William found his crayons, and William found his backpack, with accompanying pictures of William getting his lunch, crayons, and backpack. With words spelled with varied and relatively complex phonics patterns, and pictures that enable guessing, this type of text does not encourage children to look carefully at the letters in words to decode them-and the letters and their sequence are what make one word different from another.

Teacher feedback to children's decoding errors also matters. This feedback should emphasize attention to the print and application of decoding skills, as would occur as part of a structured literacy approach. However, many teachers are trained to believe that small errors such as reading a for the or this for that can be ignored, because they do not greatly alter meaning (Spear-Swerling, 2018). Nevertheless, beyond the earliest grades, good readers decode with a very high degree of accuracy and do not make frequent errors of this type (e.g., Daane, Campbell, Grigg, Goodman & Oranje, 2005).

Are there children who learn to read well with typical literacy practices? Certainly. However, the typical literacy practices outlined in this section are not nearly as effective for children with dyslexia and other literacy difficulties as are structured literacy practices (Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & Barnes, 2018; Foorman et al., 2016; International Dyslexia Association, 2017).
Why Is Structured Literacy Effective?
First, SL explicitly and effectively addresses foundational literacy skills, a core need of children with dyslexia as well as many other struggling students. Also, in all components of literacy, SL emphasizes teaching that is clear, systematic, and unambiguous to the learner-all important qualities for students experiencing difficulty.

Finally, SL instruction can be very engaging to struggling students. Explicit teaching has been criticized as "drill and kill" that dulls interest and creativity, with typical literacy practices presented as inherently more engaging to children. Little research supports this view (Archer & Hughes, 2011).

Reading children's literature with beautiful pictures or extended opportunities to write for pleasure can indeed be motivating-but not for students who cannot decode or write well enough to enjoy them. Helping children to succeed at literacy is a key way to motivate and engage them, as well as to prepare them for ongoing, higher-level literacy learning.

Reading children's literature with beautiful pictures or extended opportunities to write for pleasure can indeed be motivating-but not for students who cannot decode or write well enough to enjoy them. Helping children to succeed at literacy is a key way to motivate and engage them, as well as to prepare them for ongoing, higher-level literacy learning.
Moving Forward
Structured literacy approaches are much more successful than many typical literacy practices for meeting the needs of children with dyslexia and other literacy problems. SL prioritizes teacher-led, explicit instruction in all important components of literacy. Initial phonics instruction uses a phoneme-grapheme (encoding) and grapheme-phoneme (decoding) level approach. Texts and other materials are well coordinated with the phonics program.

If educators are prepared to implement this kind of instruction, and are given appropriate instructional materials, they can reach a much wider range of children than with typical literacy practices. Virtually all teachers want to be effective with their students. Let's give them the knowledge and tools to do so.
References
Archer, A., & Hughes, C. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford.

Brady, S. (2011). Efficacy of phonics teaching for reading outcomes: Indications from post-NRP research. In S. Brady, D. Braze, & C. Fowler (Eds.), Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp. 69-96). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Daane, M. C., Campbell, J. R., Grigg, W. S., Goodman, M. J., & Oranje, A. (2005). F ourth-grade students reading aloud: NAEP 2002 Special Study of Oral Reading (NCES 2006-469). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2018). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J.,...Wagner, R. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

International Dyslexia Association. (2017). Effective reading instruction for students with dyslexia (fact sheet). Retrieved fromhttps://dyslexiaida.org/effective-reading-instruction/

Moats, L. C. (2017). Can prevailing approaches to reading instruction accomplish the goals of RTI? Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 43, 15-22.

Spear-Swerling, L. (2018). Structured literacy and typical literacy practices: Understanding differences to create instructional opportunities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51, 201-211.

Louise Spear-Swerling, Ph.D., is Professor Emerita in the Department of Special Education at Southern Connecticut State University. She has prepared both general and special educators to teach literacy for many years. Dr. Spear-Swerling helped to write IDA's Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading. Her most recent book, published by Brookes, is The Power of RTI and Reading Profiles: A Blueprint for Solving Reading Problems.
Copyright © 2019 International Dyslexia Association (IDA). Opinions expressed in The Examiner and/or via links do not necessarily reflect those of IDA. We encourage sharing of Examiner articles. If portions are cited, please make appropriate reference. Articles may not be reprinted for the purpose of resale. Permission to republish this article is available from info@dyslexia.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here's Why Schools Should Use Structured Literacy - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recently the topic of Structured Literacy teaching has sparked considerable interest. Educators and parents often have questions about this approach:

# data[].attributes.headline
Reading League: Do this Not That Infographic

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading League: Do this Not That Infographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The whole language approach to literacy assumes that students will expand their understanding of text and reading concepts through repeated exposure to rich children's literature. Although phonics , decoding , and spelling are addressed in word study, they are not explicitly or systematically taught.

Rather, students are encouraged to activate the " three cueing system ", which promotes guessing based on semantics (context clues, pictures, background knowledge), syntax (use of language patterns), or graphophonic cues (sounding out words).

Although no one would argue that the use of context clues is a beneficial strategy in reading, Dr. David Kilpatrick reminds us that context helps identify the meaning of words but should not be promoted as an effective strategy for word identification (2015).

As the whole language approach took root in elementary classrooms across the country, the use of phonics instruction faded away. Over time, students did not become more reliable. They either became more reliant on compensatory strategies or relied more on compensatory strategies.

Decades of reading research has shown that reading is not an innate ability. Unlike learning to speak, children must receive instruction and exposure to learn how to read. As the necessity for phonics instruction made its way to the forefront once again, followers of the whole language approach adopted phonics lessons as an addition to the cueing system and referred to the enhancement as "Balanced Literacy".

Children cannot encode and decode naturally. Balanced Literacy exposes young readers to unfamiliar text causing compensatory strategies, such as relying on picture cues, while valuable instructional time passes.

With a heightened awareness of the rising number of students reading below grade level combined with an increase in advocacy for dyslexia intervention, "Structured Literacy" stepped into the spotlight.

Structured Literacy is an umbrella term that was adopted by the International Dyslexia Association to refer to the many programs (like Orton Gillingham) that teach reading by following the evidence and research behind the Science of Reading. Programs that exemplify the components and methods that are outlined in the term, Structured Literacy have been found to be beneficial for all students and essential for students who struggle with reading.

Be sure to check out the rest of our blog series on Structured Literacy vs. Balanced Literacy:

About The Author

Dr. Kirstina Ordetx is a Level 4 Master Instructor with The Institute for Multi-Sensory Education (IMSE). She holds a doctorate in Counseling Psychology with a concentration in pediatric neurology. Dr. Ordetx is an educational specialist with over 25 years of clinical experience, research, and consultation. She is a certified Structured Literacy Dyslexia Interventionist through the Center for Effective Reading Instruction, a Certified Nutrition and Wellness Consultant, Executive Functions Coach, and a registered Licensed Mental Health Intern. Dr. Ordetx has published two books that compile her research and practice in Theory of Mind. She has served on accreditation committees for the Florida Council of Independent Schools, is a university adjunct professor in developmental and child psychology, and presents at various national and international conferences. Dr. Ordetx is head of school for a private academy in Lakewood Ranch, Florida specializing in the multi-sensory education of students who have language and learning-based differences. She is the Executive Director of the Pinnacle Pediatric Therapy Group, a multi-disciplinary, pediatric therapy clinic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is Balanced Literacy? Part 2 of Structured Literacy vs. Balanced Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the 1980s and 1990s, there existed a debate revolving around the question: What's better: structured literacy or balanced literacy?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teaching, Reading, and Learning: The Reading League Podcast

Teaching, Reading, and Learning: The Reading League Podcast elevates important contributions to the educational community, with the goal of inspiring teachers, informing practice, and celebrating people in the community who have influenced teaching and literacy to the betterment of children. The podcast features people whose life stories are compelling and rich in ways that are instructive to us all. The podcast will focus on literacy as we know it (reading and writing) but will also connect to other "literacies" that impact children's learning; for example, emotional, physical, and social literacies as they apply to teachers and children.
Teaching, Reading, and Learning: The Reading League Podcast is taking a short break following our June 2022 episode.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teaching, Reading & Learning: The Podcast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teaching, Reading & Learning: The Podcast elevates important contributions to the educational community, with the goal of inspiring teachers, informing practice, and celebrating people in the community who have influenced teaching and literacy to the betterment of children.

# data[].attributes.headline
LETRS: Guidance for Educators Using a Balanced Literacy Program

# data[].attributes.subject
LETRS: Guidance for Educators Using a Balanced Literacy Program

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guidance for Educators Using a Balanced Literacy Program .pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Science of Reading: The Podcast, hosted by Susan Lambert, delivers the latest insights from researchers and practitioners in early reading. Listen today!

# data[].attributes.headline
Structured Literacy: Applying SOR in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Structured Literacy: Applying SOR in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.headline
PAST Phonological Awareness Screening Test

# data[].attributes.subject
PAST Phonological Awareness Screening Test

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The PAST can be downloaded above. Please also download and carefully read the instructions before using. Information can also be found in the manual "Equipped for Reading Success" by David A. Kilpatrick, Ph.D in chapter 11 on how to effectively use the test. Make sure to also practice using the test before using it with [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Kastner Collection: Sound-Spelling Walls

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Wakelet includes professional learning resources related to the knowledge and practices necessary to effectively implement sound walls. This Wakelet will have ongoing updates. You may also access every Wakelet from the Kastner Collection at this link: https://wke.lt/w/s/mcU0bZ

# data[].attributes.headline
Sound Walls Video - Making the Speech to Print Connection 

# data[].attributes.subject
Sound Walls Video - Making the Speech to Print Connection 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sound Walls - Making the Speech to Print Connection

# 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.attachment_link.title
Phonemic Awareness Assessments & Lesson Plans | Heggerty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These student assessments can be used to monitor student progress with phonological and phonemic awareness skills, and the results can be used to plan for instruction. The Heggerty Phonemic Awareness assessments are not required to teach the curriculum. Please note: English assessments were updated August 2021 to align to the digital assessments now available on myHeggerty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's time to reignite your passion for teaching! Triple R Teaching provides simple strategies and practical tips for PreK-grade 3 educators. Anna Geiger, M.Ed., will show you how to make small changes to improve how you teach literacy concepts. Look forward to episodes about Anna's transition from b...

# 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.provider_name
University of Florida College of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Below, you will find lesson templates and sample lessons, along with suggestions for structuring your lessons. The lesson templates provided here are guides to follow as you design your own lessons, using the materials in the instructional activities section.

Your lessons should be tailored to your students' grade level and reading abilities, and they should follow your school's scope and sequence for foundational skills in reading. If your school doesn't have a scope and sequence, to download ours.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Below, you will find lesson templates and sample lessons, along with suggestions for structuring your lessons. The lesson templates provided here are guides to follow as you design your own lessons, using the materials in the instructional activities section.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share This: `

What is dyslexia?

Dyslexia is a language-based learning disability. Dyslexia refers to a cluster of symptoms, which result in people having difficulties with specific language skills, particularly reading. Students with dyslexia usually experience difficulties with other language skills such as spelling, writing, and pronouncing words. Dyslexia affects individuals throughout their lives; however, its impact can change at different stages in a person's life. It is referred to as a learning disability because dyslexia can make it very difficult for a student to succeed academically in the typical instructional environment, and in its more severe forms, will qualify a student for special education, special accommodations, or extra support services.

What causes dyslexia?

The exact causes of dyslexia are still not completely clear, but anatomical and brain imagery studies show differences in the way the brain of a person with dyslexia develops and functions. Moreover, most people with dyslexia have been found to have problems with identifying the separate speech sounds within a word and/or learning how letters represent those sounds, a key factor in their reading difficulties. Dyslexia is not due to either lack of intelligence or desire to learn; with appropriate teaching methods, students with dyslexia can learn successfully.

How widespread is dyslexia?

About 13-14% of the school population nationwide has a handicapping condition that qualifies them for special education. Current studies indicate that one half of all the students who qualify for special education are classified as having a learning disability (LD) (6-7%). About 85% of those students have a primary learning disability in reading and language processing. Nevertheless, many more people-perhaps as many as 15-20% of the population as a whole-have some of the symptoms of dyslexia, including slow or inaccurate reading, poor spelling, poor writing, or mixing up similar words. Not all of these will qualify for special education, but they are likely to struggle with many aspects of academic learning and are likely to benefit from systematic, explicit, instruction in reading, writing, and language.

Dyslexia occurs in people of all backgrounds and intellectual levels. People with dyslexia can be very bright. They are often capable or even gifted in areas such as art, computer science, design, drama, electronics, math, mechanics, music, physics, sales, and sports.

In addition, dyslexia runs in families; parents with dyslexia are very likely to have children with dyslexia. For some people, their dyslexia is identified early in their lives, but for others, their dyslexia goes unidentified until they get older.

What are the effects of dyslexia?

The impact that dyslexia has is different for each person and depends on the severity of the condition and the effectiveness of instruction or remediation. The core difficulty is with word recognition and reading fluency, spelling, and writing. Some individuals with dyslexia manage to learn early reading and spelling tasks, especially with excellent instruction, but later experience their most debilitating problems when more complex language skills are required, such as grammar, understanding textbook material, and writing essays.

People with dyslexia can also have problems with spoken language, even after they have been exposed to good language models in their homes and good language instruction in school. They may find it difficult to express themselves clearly, or to fully comprehend what others mean when they speak. Such language problems are often difficult to recognize, but they can lead to major problems in school, in the workplace, and in relating to other people. The effects of dyslexia reach well beyond the classroom.

Dyslexia can also affect a person's self-image. Students with dyslexia often end up feeling "dumb" and less capable than they actually are. After experiencing a great deal of stress due to academic problems, a student may become discouraged about continuing in school.

How is dyslexia diagnosed?

Before referring a student for a comprehensive evaluation, a school or district may choose to track a student's progress with a brief screening test and identify whether the student is progressing at a "benchmark" level that predicts success in reading. If a student is below that benchmark (which is equivalent to about the 40 th percentile nationally), the school may immediately deliver intensive and individualized supplemental reading instruction before determining whether the student needs a comprehensive evaluation that would lead to a designation of special education eligibility. Some students simply need more structured and systematic instruction to get back on track; they do not have learning disabilities. For those students and even for those with dyslexia, putting the emphasis on preventive or early intervention makes sense. There is no benefit to the child if special instruction is delayed for months while waiting for an involved testing process to occur. These practices of teaching first, and then determining who needs diagnostic testing based on response to instruction, are encouraged by federal policies known as Response to Intervention (RTI). Parents should know, however, that at any point they have the right to request a comprehensive evaluation under the IDEA law, whether or not the student is receiving instruction under an RTI model.

A comprehensive evaluation typically includes intellectual and academic achievement testing, as well as an assessment of the critical underlying language skills that are closely linked to dyslexia. These include receptive (listening) and expressive language skills, phonological skills including phonemic awareness, and also a student's ability to rapidly name letters and numbers. A student's ability to read lists of words in isolation, as well as words in context, should also be assessed. If a profile emerges that is characteristic of readers with dyslexia, an individualized intervention plan should be developed, which should include appropriate accommodations, such as extended time. The testing can be conducted by trained school or outside specialists. (See the Dyslexia Assessment Fact Sheet for more information.)

What are the signs of dyslexia?

The problems displayed by individuals with dyslexia involve difficulties in acquiring and using written language. It is a myth that individuals with dyslexia "read backwards," although spelling can look quite jumbled at times because students have trouble remembering letter symbols for sounds and forming memories for words. Other problems experienced by people with dyslexia include the following:

Learning to speak

Learning letters and their sounds

Organizing written and spoken language

Memorizing number facts

Reading quickly enough to comprehend

Persisting with and comprehending longer reading assignments

Spelling

Learning a foreign language

Correctly doing math operations

Not all students who have difficulties with these skills have dyslexia. Formal testing of reading, language, and writing skills is the only way to confirm a diagnosis of suspected dyslexia.

How is dyslexia treated?

Dyslexia is a lifelong condition. With proper help, many people with dyslexia can learn to read and write well. Early identification and treatment is the key to helping individuals with dyslexia achieve in school and in life. Most people with dyslexia need help from a teacher, tutor, or therapist specially trained in using a multisensory, structured language approach. It is important for these individuals to be taught by a systematic and explicit method that involves several senses (hearing, seeing, touching) at the same time. Many individuals with dyslexia need one-on-one help so that they can move forward at their own pace. In addition, students with dyslexia often need a great deal of structured practice and immediate, corrective feedback to develop automatic word recognition skills. For students with dyslexia, it is helpful if their outside academic therapists work closely with classroom teachers.

Schools can implement academic accommodations and modifications to help students with dyslexia succeed. For example, a student with dyslexia can be given extra time to complete tasks, help with taking notes, and work assignments that are modified appropriately. Teachers can give recorded tests or allow students with dyslexia to use alternative means of assessment. Students can benefit from listening to audiobooks and using text reading and word processing computer programs.

Students may also need help with emotional issues that sometimes arise as a consequence of difficulties in school. Mental health specialists can help students cope with their struggles.

What are the rights of a person with dyslexia?

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004 (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) define the rights of students with dyslexia and other specific learning disabilities. These individuals are legally entitled to special services to help them overcome and accommodate their learning problems. Such services include education programs designed to meet the needs of these students. The Acts also protect people with dyslexia against unfair and illegal discrimination.

Suggested Readings

Moats, L. C., & Dakin, K. E. (2008). Basic facts about dyslexia and other reading problems. Baltimore: The International Dyslexia Association.

Shaywitz, S. (2003). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York: Knopf.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA) thanks Louisa C. Moats, Ed.D., and Karen E. Dakin, M.Ed., for their assistance in the preparation of this fact sheet.
The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). IDA encourages the reproduction and distribution of this fact sheet.
If portions of the text are cited, appropriate reference must be made. Fact sheets may not be reprinted for the purpose of resale. © Copyright 2020. The International Dyslexia Association (IDA). For copyright information, pleaseclick here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
DYSLEXIA BASICS - International Dyslexia Association

# data[].attributes.headline
SOR: Evidence for a New Era of Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
SOR: Evidence for a New Era of Reading Instruction

# data[].attributes.headline
PaTTAN Padlet: Celebration of the Reading Rope

# data[].attributes.subject
PaTTAN Padlet: Celebration of the Reading Rope

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A 20th Celebration of Hollis Scarborough's Reading Rope- THIS PADLET MAY NOT BE REMADE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recordings and Resources Related to PaTTAN's 20th Celebration of Scarborough's Reading Rope

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Congress appointed a National Reading Panel (NPR) in 1997 to review reading research and determine the most effective methods for teaching reading. The NRP reviewed over 100,000 studies and analyzed them to see what techniques actually worked in teaching children to read. The group only looked at quantitative studies, which gathered data in a numerical form and through structured techniques. Qualitative studies, which gather data through observations such as interviews were not included. In 2000 the NRP submitted their final report. The results became the basis of the federal literacy policy at that time, which included "No Child Left Behind." We still base our understanding of evidence-based reading research on the NPR, but sadly, some of their major recommendations have been largely ignored. As a result we are continuing to experience a reading crisis. They concluded that there were five essential components to reading, known as "The Big Five:"

1. Explicit instruction in Phonemic Awareness.

2. Systematic Phonics Instruction.

3. Techniques to improve Fluency. These include guided oral reading practices where the student reads aloud and the teacher makes corrections when the student mispronounces a word. A teacher can also model fluent reading to the student. Fluency includes accuracy, speed, understanding and prosody. Word calling is not the same as fluency.

4. Teaching vocabulary words or Vocabulary Development.

5. Reading Comprehension.

Source: Lorna Wooldridge, (2017) The National Reading Panel and The Big Five, Orton-Gillingham Online Academy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
R.I.S.E Arkansas Science of Reading Resources - The Big 5

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Big 5 Congress appointed a National Reading Panel (NPR) in 1997 to review reading research and determine the most effective methods for teaching reading. The NRP reviewed over 100,000 studies and analyzed them to see what techniques actually worked in teaching children to read. The group only

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Moats, L, & Tolman, C (2009). Excerpted from Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS): Spellography for Teachers: How English Spelling Works (Module 3). Boston: Sopris West.

For more information on Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS) visit Voyager Sopris .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn the six types of syllables found in English orthography, why it's important to teach syllables, and the sequence in which students learn about both spoken and written syllables.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Listen to this audio documentary on the Educate podcast. Subscribe now.

Sonya Thomas knew something wasn't right with her son C.J. He was in first grade and he was struggling with reading. "Something was going on with him, but I could not figure it out," she said.

Teachers and school officials told her that C.J. was behind but would catch up. They told Sonya to read to him at home. But she did read to him. C.J. liked the Veggie Tales stories and "The Big Friendly Giant" by Roald Dahl. His older sister read the Goosebumps books to him.

C.J. went to Amqui Elementary, a public school in Nashville, Tennessee, where 80 percent of the students were Black or Hispanic and almost all of them were from low-income families. Test scores show most children in the school were struggling with reading. But Sonya didn't know that. She sent C.J. to Amqui because she liked the school and it's where her best friend's son went; her friend picked the kids up after school because Sonya worked late as a nurse.

C.J. is the youngest of Sonya's four kids. The three older ones had no trouble learning to read but something was different with C.J. "I started asking myself, does he have a learning disability?" She sent a handwritten note to the school, requesting that he be tested. Records show the school didn't do it.

Second grade came and went. Then third and fourth grade, and C.J. was still having trouble reading. Sonya didn't know what to do. Tutoring? Private school? Those weren't things she could afford. She was desperate.

And she knew something about how C.J. felt. She'd struggled to learn how to read, too.

As she grew older, she says it wasn't that she couldn't read the words; it's that she didn't know what a lot of the words meant. Not just when she was reading, but when people were talking, too. She noticed it with colleagues at work. "Sometimes when they would have conversations, I didn't know what they were talking about," she said. "I would find myself Googling words." It was embarrassing. She did not want this to happen to C.J.

But the schools kept telling her C.J. was doing fine. His grades were good. He was a well-behaved kid. Then, seventh grade, 2018. C.J. had moved to a new school that year, a public charter school in Nashville. C.J.'s adviser called Sonya in for a meeting. She told her that C.J. was reading on a second-grade level.

"I lost it," Sonya said. "I sobbed." Remembering the moment during an interview brought tears to her eyes.

The adviser said the school would help C.J., and Sonya wanted to believe it. But she'd put her faith in the school system for years, and now she had a seventh grader who was reading on the level of kids nearly half his age.

Sonya was determined to figure out what happened with C.J. - and to help other families in the same situation. "Nobody else should walk away feeling like that," she said.

The kids left behind

There are kids like C.J. all over the country. Learning to read does not come easily to them. Schools tell their parents: Read to them. They'll be OK. But many won't be.

Reading is essential - not just for school success, but for life. When children have trouble learning to read, it can kick off a devastating downward spiral. 1 Struggling readers are more likely to report feeling sad, lonely, angry, anxious and depressed. 2 Their poor reading skills make it hard for them to keep up in other subject areas. They're more likely to have behavior problems, to drop out of school and to end up in the criminal justice system. 3

Despite the high stakes, lots of kids in this country can't read very well. You can see it in the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a standardized test given every two years to measure the reading comprehension of American students. More than a third of fourth graders don't read on a basic level.
U.S. fourth-graders' reading levels over time
SOURCE: The National Assessment of Educational Progress. *In 1992 and 1994, testing accommodations were not permitted.

Why are so many children struggling with reading - the most basic, most fundamental academic skill?

It's a question I've been reporting on for several years. What I've found is that reading instruction in many schools is based on a belief that if children are read to a lot, reading should come pretty easily for them. Decades of scientific research on reading shows this isn't true. Some kids learn to read easily, but many children struggle. It doesn't matter how much they are read to or the number of books in their home. They will not become good readers unless they are taught how their written language works. 4

But prevailing approaches to early reading instruction in this country minimize direct instruction. 5 The teacher's role is mainly to guide students, to create an environment that is conducive to learning how to read: setting up reading groups, reading with kids, helping them find books on their reading level.

This approach creates a lot of struggling readers. Some of these struggling readers get the help they need but a lot can depend on their family income, their race and ethnicity, and what kind of school they go to. Family income matters, because if a school isn't teaching a child how to read, there are other options such as paying for tutors or private schools. Race matters, because white children are significantly more likely to go to public schools where more kids are successful with reading; that means when white kids struggle, their reading problems tend to stand out and get attention. 6 And if a child has a reading disability, a white child is much more likely to get special education services.

America's approach to reading instruction is having an especially devastating impact on Black, Hispanic and American Indian children.
U.S. fourth-graders' reading levels by race/ethnicity
SOURCE: The National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2019.

The downward spiral that can start with early reading problems is a source of profound inequality in our society. This could be prevented if more educators and policymakers understood what cognitive scientists have figured out over the past several decades about what's going on when kids struggle with reading.

A proposal for understanding reading difficulty

Wes Hoover is a cognitive psychologist who first got interested in reading when he was a graduate student at the University of Texas in the 1970s. 7 At the time, a big debate was going on among academics about what children need to learn to become good readers. The fight was focused on phonics instruction.

One side said: If kids know how the sounds in words are represented by letters, reading comprehension will follow. Teach kids decoding.

The other side said: If kids are focused on the meaning of what they're reading, they can figure out what the words say. Teach kids comprehension.

"Word recognition is complex. Language comprehension is complex. But the big idea of reading is that if you can master those two complex skills, then you can master reading comprehension."
Wes Hoover

Hoover studied under a professor, Philip Gough, who was trying to figure out the relationship between decoding and comprehension. 8 Gough was particularly interested in why some people have a hard time understanding what they read. He was interested in reading difficulty.

What Gough knew was this: When children start school, the vast majority of them are already quite good at speakingtheir native language. "The average American 6-year-old," he wrote in a paper, "has a mastery of English [that] would be the envy of any college graduate learning English as a second language." 9

But young children don't know how to read most of the words they know how to say. If children can learn to decode, Gough thought, they should be able to comprehend text up to the level at which they can comprehend spoken language.

In 1986, Gough and a colleague, William Tunmer, came up with an equation to describe this idea. They called it the Simple View of Reading. 10

The equation says that a person's ability to comprehend what they read is the product of their decoding skills and their language comprehension ability.

Language comprehension is your ability to understand meaning when someone is talking or when text is read out loud to you.

Decoding is your ability to read printed words quickly and accurately. (Decoding is more commonly referred to now as "word recognition" in the Simple View equation, because scientists have discovered that readers become so skilled they don't have to sound out most of the words they see; they know the words instantly, on sight.) 11

The Simple View doesn't say that reading is simple. It says that reading comprehension can be divided into two parts.

"It's the big idea of reading," Hoover said. "Word recognition is complex. Language comprehension is complex. But the big idea of reading is that if you can master those two complex skills, then you can master reading comprehension. That's the hypothesis."

The hypothesis was first tested and verified in a study Hoover published with Gough in 1990. 12 It's been confirmed in more than 150 studies since. 13 The studies show the only way to be a good reader is to have both good language comprehension ability and good word recognition skills, as this figure illustrates.

The Simple View doesn't say how word recognition or language comprehension skills develop. And it does not say how they should be taught. 14 But it makes clear that the first task of the beginning reader is to learn how to decode the words he or she knows how to say.

Children who don't learn to decode in the early grades can easily grow into adulthood without knowing how to read. I met some of these kids at a juvenile detention facility in Houston. They're being taught to read as part of an ongoing study by researchers at the University of Houston who are investigating the links between reading problems and involvement with the juvenile justice system. 15

Stumped by the words

I visited the Burnett-Bayland Rehabilitation Center in February 2018. It's a large, tan building surrounded by metal fencing. The lobby reminded me of an auto repair shop: worn-out stuffed chairs, old magazines, a chemical odor.

I was led through two large locked doors by a staff member, who took me on a tour. It was all boys, as young as 10. More than 90 percent of them were Black or Hispanic. They walked the halls in blue jumpsuits, their hands clasped behind their backs. We passed the units where they slept on thin plastic mattresses and the isolation room where they were sent when their behavior was out of control. And then we got to a windowless cinderblock room with heavy locked doors on each side. Inside were a table and two green chairs. This was where the boys visited with their families once a week. It was also where some of them were finally being taught how to read.

I sat in on a few of these tutoring sessions. They included short lessons on concepts as basic as how two letters can represent one sound. There were vocabulary building activities. Then the students did some reading. Some of the boys could barely read. 16

"B-l-ee ..." said one boy I'll call Mateo, struggling to read the word "bleak." I wasn't allowed to use the boys' real names or ask why they were here. Mateo was 15 at the time, short and skinny with a shadow of a mustache above his lip.

He was trying to read a story about a man taking a bus ride. Occasionally, he'd successfully sound out and there'd be a flash of recognition. "Woman!" he exclaimed after slowly decoding the word. But it was clear from earlier in the lesson that Mateo didn't know the meaning of a lot of the words he was trying to say: fleet, sneer, gloat. If someone had read the story out loud to him, he wouldn't have understood it all. Mateo had a reading comprehension problem because he was having a hard time with both word recognition and language comprehension.

But if Mateo had been taught how to sound out words earlier in his life, it's likely he would have known the meaning of a lot more words at the age of 15.

That's because of something reading researchers call "Matthew" effects, a term borrowed from the Bible. 17 It's the idea that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Here's how it works in reading.

Let's say you start school, and you get off to a good start learning how to decode words. Now you can read the words you know how to say, and through reading you begin to learn the meaning of words you've never heard before. That's how the rich get richer.

But the opposite can happen. You have a hard time learning to decode. Maybe you have a learning disability. Or maybe no one teaches you how to decode. Or both. Now you're a struggling reader. You can't read very well, so you don't read much, and you miss out on the opportunity to learn the meaning of new words through reading. One study estimated that a fifth grader who reads at the 90th percentile encounters about 2 million words every year just in text she or he reads outside of school. 18 A reader at the 10th percentile encounters just 8,000 words. That's the poor getting poorer.

When a person reaches age 15 without knowing how to sound out the word "bleak," is that a learning disability or was the child never taught how to read?

The kids in the study at the juvenile detention facility in Houston all read at the third grade level or below when they started in the tutoring program. Latashia Crenshaw, who was director of Education Support Services for the juvenile probation department when I visited, estimated that close to half the kids who come through the system have disabilities that were never identified by their schools. When she talked to their parents, they would tell her: "I knew my son had a problem in first grade when I was coming up to the school every day, telling you that something was wrong, and no one listened."

The University of Houston researchers are betting that a lot of the struggling readers locked up in the juvenile detention system can be taught how to read. Students in the study each receive 24 reading lessons of 90 minutes each. The researchers are collecting data over time to see if the reading lessons translate into things like reduced criminal activity or better educational outcomes.

I asked some of the kids in the study what they remembered about being taught to read in school. "That it was hard," said a 17-year-old I'll call DeShawn. "I just didn't know none of the words." I asked what he was learning in his reading lessons. "Like, 'ph.' It's a 'f,'" he said. "Like physics. I never knew that."

DeShawn might have a learning disability. But that's not why he couldn't read the word "physics." Someone finally taught him what he needed to know, and now he can read that word.

'Surround him with books'

Paul Morgan is a professor at Penn State University who studies the risk factors for learning difficulties. 19 He had a case study in his own home about a decade ago.

His younger son was in first grade and reading was really hard for him. Morgan's other son had been fine. "Our oldest is a voracious reader and took to it readily," he said. "He seemed to benefit from what our local school did in terms of teaching reading."

"If you can't read well in the early grades it really starts to have negative consequences on your social emotional development and your behavior."
Paul Morgan

When Morgan and his wife brought up their younger son's struggles with the school, they were told: "Read storybooks to him, surround him with books." But they'd been reading to him since he was a baby. They had tons of books in their home.

Morgan knew, from his own research, that his son needed something he wasn't getting enough of in school. He needed to be taught how to read words. So, Morgan and his wife started doing that.

"We were in a position to reorganize our work schedules," he said. They bought a book online and every morning, one of them would work with him before school. "And then he was OK. Things made sense to him. He was decoding and starting to read quickly and fluently."

They caught the problem and were able to fix it. That's not going to be the case with every child. Some kids will need lots of help. But intervening early is critical because when kids don't get off to a good start with word recognition, it can begin to affect their motivation and their mental health. 20

"If you can't read well in the early grades, your peers notice, your teacher notices, you notice," Morgan said. "And it really starts to have negative consequences on your social emotional development and your behavior."

Children who are still struggling with reading at the end of first grade rarely catch up because the kids who get off to a good start reading words are catapulting ahead. It's the rich get richer phenomenon. Everyone else quickly gets left behind.

Yet a 2019 Education Week survey found that more than half of teachers and 56 percent of postsecondary instructors who teach courses on reading said kids don't need a good grasp of phonics to read. 21 That doesn't necessarily mean they reject phonics instruction. The majority of teachers describe their approach to teaching reading as "balanced literacy" and that typically includes some phonics. But it also includes the idea that readers don't need to understand how the sounds in words are represented by letters. It's that idea from the 1970s that if kids are focused on the meaning of what they're reading, they can figure out what the words say.

This idea has been repeatedly debunked by cognitive scientists, but it lingers in education because the idea that children need to be taught how to read words has long been resisted by many educators and literacy experts. 22 Even as some people who previously dismissed the importance of phonics instruction now embrace it, an assumption that continues to undergird reading instruction is that reading skill develops naturally, as long as kids are in an environment that supports and encourages lots of reading.

When this approach doesn't work for a child, there are typically two responses.

1. There must be a problem in the home. The child wasn't read to enough.

2. There must be a problem in the child. He or she has a disability.

But usually it's neither. Most of the time, when kids can't read, it's because they weren't taught how to do it.

The importance of language comprehension

You can't be a good reader without good word recognition skills. Reading scientists refer to word recognition as a "sine qua non" of being a good reader. 23 But good word recognition skills are only half the equation. Research shows that once kids have mastered the basics of decoding, their ability to understand what they read is largely determined by the level of their language comprehension. 24

There's a lot to language comprehension. 25 It's all the words you know the meaning of, and your understanding of how language works - grammar, syntax. 26 It also includes the things you know. For example, if you don't know what "sine qua non" means, you may not have fully understood the paragraph above. "Sine qua non" is a Latin phrase that means "an essential condition; something that is absolutely necessary."

Knowledge is critical when it comes to understanding what you read. 27 Consider this passage:

Australia failed to fully capitalise on the second-wicket stand of 182 between Smith and Finch, as Michael Clarke's men were stunted by the off-breaks of Ravichandran Ashwin and a curious collective failure against back-of-a-length bowling. 28

You may be able to read all the words just fine but have absolutely no idea what this passage is about - unless you know something about cricket. This passage is from a BBC report on Australia's victory in the 2015 Cricket World Cup semi-final.

Your ability to comprehend what you read is linked to your knowledge. This is one reason there's an association between a child's reading comprehension and their family's income; more income often means more opportunity for experiences that build knowledge of the world.

But how well you do on a reading comprehension test is going to be partly a function of what's on the test. A 10-year-old in New Zealand, where there's lots of cricket, would probably fare much better on a test that included a passage about cricket than a 10-year-old in the United States would. The American kid would likely do better with a passage about baseball. But of course, some kids know much more about baseball than others. A famous study found that struggling readers who know a lot about baseball did better comprehending a passage about baseball than good readers who don't know much about baseball. 29

The challenge with reading comprehension tests is that, at the end of the day, they are tests of knowledge, and in the United States we don't have a canon of knowledge we've decided every child needs to master. We have common standards, which are essentially lists of things students should be able to do, such as "determine the main idea" and "describe characters in a story." 30 We don't have agreed upon curriculum. It's up to states, to schools - sometimes to individual teachers - to decide what to teach. They choose the books, the materials, the content.

One of the ironic consequences of nationwide concern about poor reading scores is that schools appear to be focusing more on reading instruction at the expense of other subjects. 31 Time spent on reading instruction in the early grades typically takes 90 minutes to three hours daily; science and social studies might be 30 to 45 minutes, a few times a week - at best. Add to this the fact that kids who are struggling with reading are often pulled out of class during science and social studies for extra reading help.

When schools don't put enough focus on general knowledge, it can be particularly harmful to the reading development of kids from low-income families. Consider two children.

One starts school with lots of knowledge and vocabulary. Her parents are college graduates who chat with her about lots of things. She attends summer camps, goes on vacations, takes trips to the science museum.

Another child hasn't had the same opportunities: he rarely leaves his neighborhood, his parents work late, there may be few bedtime stories.

You can teach both of these kids how to decode, but the girl will likely have an edge when it comes to reading comprehension because of the knowledge she is acquiring outside of school. If a goal of education is equity, schools have to pay attention to building knowledge and vocabulary, exposing kids to lots of content, helping them access a wide range of information and experiences. And schools need to encourage kids to read a lot. Because reading is one of the best ways to learn.

That's why teaching kids how to read words is so important. A child who comes to school weak on the language comprehension side of the equation will never catch up if he doesn't get good at decoding. But if a child is taught to decode in the early grades, he has just been given his best shot.

'I ain't none a yo' mama!'

Making sure that children get off to a good start with reading is critical because of the downward spiral that can begin as soon as kids begin to struggle. This means recognizing the factors that can make learning to read more challenging for some kids.

One of the big challenges for many children is when the language they speak at home is different from the language they use at school. English language learners, for example. Kids who speak Spanish or Korean or Arabic at home. But this can be native English speakers, too.

Julie Washington is a speech-language pathologist at Georgia State University who studies language and reading development in African American children. She's specifically interested in the role of African American English. 32

African American English is a dialect of English. Every language has dialects. They're rule-governed variations of a parent language that can affect not just the pronunciation of words but also vocabulary and grammar.

"An example of African American English is, 'One day, me and my mom was at home,'" Washington explained. "That is completely acceptable in African American English."

There was a moment early in her career when she realized that children who come to school speaking African American English might have a harder time learning how to read.

She was reading "Are You My Mother?" by P.D. Eastman with a 4-year-old girl. The book is about a baby bird who is looking for his mother. He approaches different animals and objects and asks, "Are you my mother?"

When Washington was done reading the book, she asked the girl to retell the story.

"Is you my mama?" the girl exclaimed. "I ain't none a yo' mama!"

"We've decided as a country that if you are having trouble reading and you're poor, you're having trouble with reading because you're poor. Because our policy does not allow you to be both learning disabled and poor."
Julie Washington

When she went back to her office, Washington thought about how much work that girl had to do. She listened, recoded the story into her own language, and then retold it. "That takes a lot of working memory," Washington said. "It takes a pretty good vocabulary."

That little girl had to do a lot of work because there was a difference between the language she knew and the language of the book.

"The kid who comes to school whose language system mirrors the book doesn't have that work to do," she said. "He can go straight for decoding and not have to do all of those other steps in between."

Washington says schools need to understand that children who are heavy dialect users may need more time, and more help, to be successful with reading. 33 She says almost all low-income African American children speak African American English at home. Middle- and upper-income kids are more likely to either not use dialect at all, or to be able to code switch. "They've had more access outside of the community," Washington said. "They go to schools where there are more kids using mainstream English."

Who gets help?

Think of family income as a kind of buffer when it comes to the risk of being a struggling reader.

But it's not just your family's income that can tilt things in your favor when it comes to learning how to read; it's the income level of the school you attend too. Research shows that schools where the majority of kids are from poor families are less effective on average at promoting reading achievement. 34 Who goes to high-poverty schools? 35 According to the U.S. Department of Education, nearly half of all Black and Hispanic students in the United States attend high-poverty schools but only 8 percent of white students do.

When children from low-income families are concentrated in the same schools, it can be difficult to identify the children with reading disabilities such as dyslexia because so many of the kids are struggling. "I go into poor schools - nobody has dyslexia in a poor school," Washington said. "In the face of a population where eight and a half out of ten are struggling with reading, who has a reading disability? The answer is, we have no idea."

She says part of the problem is the way federal law defines learning disabilities. The law says a child cannot qualify for a learning disability if that child's learning problems are primarily the result of economic disadvantage. 36 "We've decided as a country that if you are having trouble reading and you're poor, you're having trouble with reading because you're poor," she said. "Because our policy does not allow you to be both learning disabled and poor."

The purpose of the policy was to prevent low-income children of color from being overidentified for special education. 37 But the policy has had unintended consequences, according to Paul Morgan.

"We hear from teachers that they have been told not to refer any more children of color," he said. "That they're already at their threshold."

Research by Morgan and his colleagues shows that white children in the United States who are struggling the most with reading are significantly more likely than children of color to get special education services. 38
Who gets special education?
Among children whose reading achievement placed them in the lowest 10 percent of all scores, white children were more likely to be receiving special education services.

This data suggests that more than half the children of color in this country who are struggling the most with reading are not getting the help they need and are entitled to by federal law. It also suggests that many white children are not getting help, either. Morgan says getting special education services for a student with a reading disability can be difficult no matter who you are or what kind of school your child goes to. "Too often parents have to fight for their children to be provided the services," he said. "And when the school says 'no,' there's not much of a recourse for the parent to engage in, short of legal action, which is very costly."

It's a system that favors people with money. I've interviewed parents who have spent thousands of dollars on attorneys to try to get their children into special ed, because in many schools, special education is the only way for struggling readers to get the kind of explicit instruction they need. 39

Kids who don't get into special ed, or don't have families that can pay for tutors or private school, may never get what they need to become good readers. Like the kids at the juvenile detention facility in Houston.

'Why isn't everybody in this country angry like me?'

When Sonya Thomas was told her seventh grade son was on a second-grade reading level, it changed her life.

The next month, in October 2018, she helped found a parent advocacy group called Nashville PROPEL. 40 The name stands for "parents requiring our public education system to lead." It's a group of mostly Black parents whose children are zoned to some of the lowest-performing schools in the entire state.

Sonya says many parents don't know how far behind their kids are. "They don't know until it costs them." Like it cost her and her son C.J.

Sonya wanted to figure out what happened to C.J. Why has he had such a hard time learning to read? Does he have a learning disability the school system missed?

She requested all of C.J.'s school records, and APM Reports hired Zack Barnes, an assistant professor of special education at Austin Peay State University, to review them. 41 Barnes used to teach in the Nashville schools, so he was familiar with the forms and records in C.J.'s file. He went over them with Sonya and me.

The records show C.J. started off behind. A reading assessment in kindergarten shows he was "below benchmark." But it doesn't say what he was behind in.

At the beginning of first grade, C.J. took a reading test that placed him at the 24th percentile nationally. That means more than three quarters of first graders in the country were doing better than he was. There's a form in the file that says C.J. had no problem understanding and using vocabulary but that he spoke slowly and sometimes had a hard time asking and answering questions.

"I do remember having some concerns about his speech," Sonya said. "Like not talking a lot, being really shy." She says she sometimes had a hard time understanding what he was saying.

There's no indication in the records that C.J. was evaluated for a speech issue or a reading problem. There is the handwritten note from Sonya when C.J. was in first grade, asking the school to test him for a learning disability.

"I am very concerned," the note says. "Please assist me." But he wasn't tested.

At the end of first grade, C.J. scored at the 12th percentile on the same test he had taken at the beginning of the year. The gap between C.J. and his peers had grown even wider. Sonya teared up when Barnes pointed this out. "This tears me all to pieces," she said.

We spent nearly two hours going over C.J.'s entire school file, grade by grade. There are nearly 200 pages of records, and Barnes noticed a pattern. Some years C.J. got pulled out of the classroom for extra help with reading. His test scores went up. Then the help stopped. Barnes likened it to a lifeguard saving someone and then allowing them to drown a few minutes later. "I don't think what we are seeing is uncommon, across the country," he wrote me later in an email.

Barnes says things might have been different if C.J. had been in special education. He would have had an Individualized Education Program and rights to services protected by federal law. But to get into special ed, you need to be identified with a disability. To determine if C.J. has a disability, he'd need a full evaluation from a school psychologist. C.J. never got one of those. Barnes says he should have. "He's this kind of student that we really need to dig deep on to figure out, how can we help C.J.?"

Barnes offered to help Sonya get C.J. an evaluation. She was grateful, but angry. C.J. just finished eighth grade. She had asked for him to be tested for a learning disability in first grade. She wonders how many other kids needed help and didn't get it. "There is this heavy feeling that I have," she said, pausing for a long sigh. "I don't know how to fix it. Except to keep telling parents to question everything and everybody, so they don't have to go all of these years like I did, to try to get down to the bottom of it."

I contacted the Nashville Public Schools to see if someone could answer questions about what happened with C.J. A spokesperson declined to comment.

When reading instruction is based on the flawed assumption that reading will come pretty easily to most kids as long as they're in the right environment, reading instruction is tilted in favor of the few. The few who don't need much instruction. The few from families who can pay to get their kids what they need.

The bottom line is that learning to read is not easy for many kids. Reading difficulty is natural. 42

Cognitive scientists have known this for a long time. In 1980, Phil Gough wrote this: "The statistically average child, normally endowed and normally taught, learns to read only with considerable difficulty. He does not learn to read naturally." 43

Sonya Thomas wants everyone to know about what she and C.J. have gone through. And she wants to help other parents get what they need for their kids. She's now executive director of PROPEL, the parent group she helped to found. It's her full-time job. She wants to see a movement of parents across the country demanding better reading instruction.

"Why isn't everyone in this country angry like me? Why are they not losing sleep?" she said. "It's unacceptable for children to not have a chance right off the bat. And we are not going to let anybody sleep until we have changed for the better for all children."

Share and discuss on Facebook
Support for this program comes from The Spencer Foundation, Lumina Foundation, and The Hollyhock Foundation.
Don't miss our next investigation
Enter your email below to receive notifications of new stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Many kids struggle with reading - and children of color are far less likely to get the help they need

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A false assumption about what it takes to be a skilled reader has created deep inequalities among U.S. children, putting many on a difficult path in life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Planning the Small Group Reading Lesson - Peers and Pedagogy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This post also appears on The Reading Teacher’s Top Ten Tools Blog. It has been posted here with permission from the author. Small Group Instruction I just completed a review of 147 reading texts used in our colleges of education to teach teachers how to teach reading (National Center for Teacher Quality (NCTQ)). One troubling […]

# data[].attributes.headline
K-5 Literacy Intervention Student Learning Pathway 

# data[].attributes.subject
K-5 Literacy Intervention Student Learning Pathway 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Literacy Intervention Student Learning Pathways

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's not an easy thing, learning to read and write. Discover what it takes to build important literacy skills, and how you can help your children grow as readers, writers, and thinkers!

# data[].attributes.headline
REL Recommendations/Resources: Supporting Reading at Home

# data[].attributes.subject
REL Recommendations/Resources: Supporting Reading at Home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Learning to read begins at home through everyday parent-child interactions, long before children attend school. Your continued support of literacy development throughout elementary school positively affects your child's reading ability.

These Family Activities include easy-to-follow plans to help you support your child's foundational reading skills at home. Materials needed for each Family Activity, such as letter cards, are included. They begin with simpler activities and progress to more difficult ones. You may want to start with the first activity and move to the next when you notice that your child has a firm understanding of the content from that activity. We encourage you to select appropriate activities for your child, and feel free to set aside an activity that seems too difficult. The goal is to engage your child in activities that promote learning in a positive environment, not to induce frustration. The activities should be completed with the child, frequently, with patience, and positive feedback. Using the activities at home will be a fun way to spend family time together!

The Family Literacy Videos show families engaging their child in the Family Activities. The key points about the videos can help you know what to focus on for a specific activity.

The Family Activities were excerpted from a Kindergarten Teacher's Guide to Support Family Involvement in Foundational Reading Skills, which is free online: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2020016.pdf.
You can also access these videos free online: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVHqsnePfULqzbnu1BZf50y7HFgGNZp6v.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
educational improvement; excellence in education; educational research; statistics; statistical data; statistical surveys; national center for education evaluation and regional assistance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Introduction Learning to read begins at home through everyday parent-child interactions, long before children attend school. Your continued support of literacy development throughout elementary school positively affects your child's reading ability. These Family Activities include easy-to-follow plans to help you support your child's foundational reading skills at home.

# data[].attributes.headline
REL Foundational Skills to Support Reading K-3

# data[].attributes.subject
REL Foundational Skills to Support Reading K-3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This practice guide was prepared for the WWC by Mathematica under contract ED-IES-13-C-0010.

The following research staff contributed to the guide: Nicholas Beyler, Kelley Borradaile, Joshua Furgeson, Juliette Henke, Betsy Keating, Samina Sattar, Andrei Streke, and Sarah Wissel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WWC | Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This practice guide provides four recommendations for teaching foundational reading skills to students in kindergarten through 3rd grade. Each recommendation includes implementation steps and solutions for common obstacles. The recommendations also summarize and rate supporting evidence.

# data[].attributes.headline
REL PLC Facilitators Guide to Foundational Skills to Support Reading K-3

# data[].attributes.subject
REL PLC Facilitators Guide to Foundational Skills to Support Reading K-3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Professional Learning Communities Facilitator's Guide for the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade

The Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) Southeast developed a Professional Learning Community (PLC) Facilitators Guide to support educators in the implementation of recommendations from the What Works Clearinghouse's Practice Guide Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade. The practice guide focuses on the foundational reading skills that enable students to read words, relate those words to their oral language, and read connected text with sufficient accuracy and fluency to understand what they read. The practice guide, developed by a panel of experts comprised of researchers and practitioners, presents four recommendations that educators can use to improve literacy skills in the early grades.

Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are a form of professional development in which small groups of educators with shared interests work together with the goals of expanding their knowledge and improving their craft. REL Southeast developed PLC materials focused on the practice guide that were designed to assist a literacy leader in guiding a professional learning community in applying the recommendations from the practice guide. The materials include a facilitator's guide, participant activities, and videos. The facilitator's guide includes a framework for facilitators to conduct each of the ten PLC sessions. It also includes participant activities, discussion questions, small- and whole-group activities, and implementation and reflection activities. The participant's activities include reflection questions, lesson plan examples and templates, video-viewing guides, and sharing opportunities. The videos illustrate practices presented in the foundational reading skills practice guide.

Facilitator's Guide and Handouts

View, download, and print the full facilitator's guide as a PDF file (1.8 MB)
View, download, and print the handouts as a PDF file (558 KB)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
educational improvement; excellence in education; educational research; statistics; statistical data; statistical surveys; national center for education evaluation and regional assistance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Professional Learning Communities Facilitator's Guide for the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide Foundational Skills to Support Reading for Understanding in Kindergarten Through 3rd Grade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) conducts unbiased large-scale evaluations of education programs and practices supported by federal funds, such as Reading First and Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

# data[].attributes.headline
National Center on Intensive Interventions

# data[].attributes.subject
National Center on Intensive Interventions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NCII provides a series of reading lessons to support special education instructors, reading interventionists, and others working with students who struggle with reading. These lessons, adapted with permission from the Florida Center for Reading Research and Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, address key reading and prereading skills and incorporate research-based instructional principles that can help intensify and individualize reading instruction. The reading lessons are examples of brief instructional routines that may be used to supplement reading interventions, programs, or curricula that are currently in place. These lessons are designed to illustrate concepts and supplement, not supplant, reading instruction and interventions for struggling readers. They do not represent an exhaustive reading curriculum. It is expected that teachers would customize these lessons to meet the needs of their target students.

The NCII reading lessons are organized around the five components of reading identified by the National Reading Panel (2000): phonemic awareness, alphabetic principal or phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Intervention programs for struggling readers may focus on just one or a few of these components, or may include all five components.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading & Literacy Lessons: Instructional Strategies | NCII

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A series of reading lessons to support special education instructors, reading interventionists, and others working with students who struggle with reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Data teams serve multiple roles in the data-based individualization (DBI) process and across a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS).
View Handout
Although schools may have multiple teams that look at different types of data across a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS), when talking about the DBI process, the team is focused on the needs of individual students who are not making progress in their current intervention or special education program. It is critical that these meetings are driven by data, occur regularly, and use an efficient, consistent process that allows participants to review progress and make intervention decisions for students. NCII has created a series of tools to help teams establish efficient and effective individual student data meetings.

These resources include information for both those leading and participating in the meeting, sample agendas, tools for analyzing data, and note-taking templates. Although these tools were designed for use within the DBI process, they can be adapted and expanded to support data meetings across the tiers of a multi-tiered system of support or to support individualized education program (IEP) teams.

These documents are intended as examples, and many have been posted in word format so that you can adapt them to meet the needs of your school's team. Additional handouts are also available.

Preparing for the Meeting

Ensure that team members are prepared to discuss students by using the premeeting documents. These resources are intended to support teams in developing a holistic sense of the student, including relevant background information, current performance, current supports, prior intervention efforts, and other relevant data.

Conducting the Initial Meeting

The initial meeting documents can assist teams in facilitating an efficient and effective process for analyzing data and designing intensive intervention plans for students.

Facilitating Ongoing Meetings

Ensure that ongoing meetings run smoothly by using the progress monitoring meeting documents. These tools are intended to support teams as they review student progress monitoring data after the initial intervention plan has been put in place and determine whether the student is making progress at an acceptable rate or if adaptations to the intervention plan are necessary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Data teams serve multiple roles in the data-based individualization (DBI) process and across a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS). This resource from NCII and the PBIS Center, provides information about how DBI can support IEP implementation and provides a table with key considerations for teams working across the MTSS system.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Brain Presents: Stanislas Dahaene's Research (Video)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Brain Presents: Stanislas Dahaene's Research (Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Brain Prize Presents: Stanislas Dehaene

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Resources from IMSE | Twitter, Instagram, Facebook | Linktree

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Join Dr. Susan Hall as she summarizes the big ideas of what Dr. Dehaene tells us in his 2 books: Reading in the Brain, and How We Learn. Whether you consider this a Cliff's Note version or a review of what you've already read, this promises to be an interesting session if you love knowing what happens in the brain when a person reads.
Session Run-time: 30 minutes
Please click the buttons below to download the handout and to view another presentation by Dr. Susan Hall related to this topic, The Science of Reading: Why All the Fuss?

But first, enjoy the webinar video below.

Questions? We did not have any questions submitted during the live webinar, so we have not posted a Q&A. If you have questions after watching the replay, please email them to 95Live@95percentgroup.com with "How the Brain Reads" in the subject line. We will post a Q&A document if needed to address new questions.

Thank you for joining us!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join Dr. Susan Hall as she summarizes the big ideas of what Dr. Dehaene tells us in his 2 books: Reading in the Brain, and How We Learn. Whether you consider this a Cliff's Note version or a review of what you've already read, this promises to be an interesting session if you love knowing what happens in the brain when a person reads.

# data[].attributes.headline
Structured Literacy Lesson - Intervention

# data[].attributes.subject
Structured Literacy Lesson - Intervention