How long-standing and how deep is the science on early reading acquisition? Check out our hyperlinked timeline of history's heavy hitters. https://t.co/51siP2rO6q #notnewnews#sor#scienceofreading@ehanford
❝Andrist said other program leaders experienced rage. She felt grief.
“Just thinking about so many kids’ lives who could be dramatically different than what they’re going to be,” she said. “That is probably the heartbreak of my career.”❞
@MaryBowdenMD I’m assuming the disruption of our environment has greatly exaggerated the symptoms of menopause for many women, making it not the original design.
@rpondiscio Agreed that interests-only ain't working. However, teaching them well and attending to their interests are not mutually exclusive ends. We do both.
My kids now have to solve age appropriate math problems before each episode of Bluey, thanks to the miracle of AI reverse engineering and upgrading my TV 🔥🔥🔥
“If the kid hasn’t learned it, the teacher hasn’t taught it.”
That line from Sold a Story Season 2 is why I started Reading Simplified 25+ years ago.
Tomorrow 8pm ET: @BuildMathMinds (math) + me (reading) on episodes 1 & 2. Same factions, different subject
Can you read this? If not, you might not have grown up in rural Kentucky in the 1980s.
I was taught to read using a language that no longer exists: https://t.co/jtJfXcFb2p
“If the kid hasn’t learned it, the teacher hasn’t taught it.”
That line from Sold a Story Season 2 is why I started Reading Simplified 25+ years ago.
Tomorrow 8pm ET: @BuildMathMinds (math) + me (reading) on episodes 1 & 2. Same factions, different subject
“We’re flipping students like pancakes. Their teacher tells us they’re struggling and then we work with them and send them back in 3 weeks.”
That’s how an interventionist’s colleague describes her work: struggling readers come in, and they’re back in class in 3 weeks.
It’s a vivid line, and it deserves to be taken seriously. It’s one clear example of what can happen when instruction is efficient, diagnostic, and targeted. It isn’t a guarantee or a promise that every struggling reader needs 3 weeks, which is still unusual even for Reading Simplified, and it’s no reason to minimize students with more complex needs.
We’ve had 5+ years of Science of Reading momentum, and state regulations, training requirements, and district conversations have shifted.
That progress matters.
Yet in many places the 95% reading success goal researchers have shown is possible still feels far away.
So it’s fair to ask whether we’ve lost some urgency, whether we’ve lowered expectations because the work has felt so hard, and whether we’ve confused “more aligned” with “more effective for this child today”.
Teachers are not the problem. They’ve been working inside systems that often give them too many disconnected pieces and too few tools for fast, responsive decision-making.
Reading Simplified is built for a different kind of instructional rhythm: assess what the student can do, teach with high-leverage routines, watch the response and adjust quickly, then move the student into real reading and writing as soon as possible. That kind of instruction can renew momentum because it gives teachers clearer next steps and students more chances to show measurable growth.
The 95% goal should keep pressing us toward better tools, higher expectations, and faster evidence of progress, instead of becoming a slogan we admire from a distance.
This week, look for signs that students are moving faster than before: more accurate blending, stronger word reading, better spelling attempts, smoother connected text.
What’s one measurable sign of faster progress you’ll watch for in your next reading group?
#ScienceOfReading #ReadingIntervention #StructuredLiteracy #ReadingSimplified #LiteracyInstruction
Kids who resist reading aren't lazy. They're sick of getting it wrong. I'm speaking on day 1 of the free Close the Reading Gap Summit (Oct 19–25) with Dr. Louisa Moats and more. Free ticket: https://t.co/4rQn1RthMq
Prepare yourselves! The upcoming season of Sold a Story gets at deep-seated cultural fears that systemic instruction will turn kids into robots, says @ehanford: