Date & Time: Tuesday, May 12, 2026��at 2 p.m. ET

While districts have precise literacy data showing where students stand, families don���t. And they are the most critical component to ensuring their child succeeds.

This gap becomes even more urgent as chronic absenteeism rises. Students who miss school are among the most at risk of falling behind in literacy. Without strong family engagement, districts are fighting both challenges at once with limited visibility beyond the classroom.

In this 30-minute Ed Talk, explore current research on the literacy engagement gap and walk through a practical three-part audit to assess what families in your district actually know about reading progress and where the greatest opportunity for impact exists. Additionally, a district leader will share what she learned after examining her own literacy communication strategy, and what changed as a result.

京看稼顎壊:油Attendees will leave with a free, ready-to-use assessment tool they can use the next day in their district.

Key Takeaways:��

• What The Latest Research Says:��Why literacy data rarely reaches families in a way they can act on, and what changes when it does.
• The Attendance and Literacy Connection:��Why students who miss school struggle to build reading skills and disengage���and how family engagement reduces chronic absenteeism
• A Real District Story:��What Brookhaven School District found when auditing their own literacy communication across schools, families, and students
• Live 5-Minute Workshop:��Attendees who join the live event will be able to participate in a ThoughtExchange workshop to share and rank family engagement best practices from their peers. The workshop will generate detailed reporting.
• Free Self-Assessment Tool:��Receive a ready-to-use assessment for use in your district

This year, gain a clearer picture of what it looks like when families become true partners in literacy.

Speakers

Chad Aldeman
Founder, Read Not Guess
Columnist, The 74 Million

Rachel Powell, PhD, CCC-SLP, BCS-CL
Director of Curriculum, Instruction, and Federal Programs, Brookhaven School District (MS)

Kara Stern, Ph.D.
Director of Education, SchoolStatus

Sponsored by

The post Why Literacy Gains Require Family Partnerships & How to Build Them appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

Date & Time: Thursday, March 05, 2026 at 2 p.m. ET

Is your district���s early literacy intervention happening early enough?

New research from Johns Hopkins University Center for Research and Reform in Education (CRRE) is prompting K-12 leaders to rethink when reading intervention has the greatest impact. Schools that prioritized 1st grade intervention saw lasting results:

17 in 20 students who met benchmark in 1st grade maintained reading proficiency through the end of 2nd grade

In this webinar, you���ll hear from participants of the study, including a Johns Hopkins researcher and a Fall River Schools administrator leading the district���s early literacy transformation.

京看稼顎壊:油Attendees who join the live event will be able to participate in a ThoughtExchange workshop to share and rank the best practices from their peers on reframing early literacy intervention timing.***

Key Takeaways��

• The Research:��Key findings from a two-year study tracking 1st grade intervention outcomes across 13 districts
• Logistics, Challenges, and What Works:��Hear strategies for implementing early intervention at scale from Fall River Schools
• Most Impactful Intervention Windows:��Understand when interventions offer fast, meaningful, and lasting results
• ***Live 5-minute Workshop:��Audience participation will generate reports showing the common ground and differences among district leaders, the summary of highest and lowest rated best practices, the top themes, SWOT analysis, and potential next steps

Speakers

Amanda Neitzel (Inns), PhD, Associate Research Professor; Deputy Director of Evidence Research, Center for Research and Reform in Education

Stephanie Kennedy, Director of English Language Arts, Fall River Schools (MA)

Katharine Sullivan, Executive Director, The Big Lift, San Mateo County Human Services Agency (CA)

Cherie Goldman, Literacy Effectiveness Officer, Savannah Chatham County Public School System (GA)

(Moderator) Dr. Deborah Gist, Superintendent-in-Residence, Ignite Reading

Sponsored by

The post The 1st Grade Impact: New Reading Research Reframes Early Literacy Intervention Timing appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

We explore real-world scenarios where educators encounter challenges interpreting item analysis from standards-based ELA assessments and use these examples to illustrate effective diagnostic approaches. Commentary follows, culminating in a set of guiding principles to optimize use of item analysis data in ELA.

Scenario 2: Identifying Student Errors & Profiling Student Strengths & Weaknesses

Mrs. Profile Pinpoints Intervention

Javier, a multilingual first grader, completes the STAR Phonics assessment, designed to highlight strengths and weaknesses across phonics categories. Upon review, Mrs. Profile notices several students, including Javier, struggle with decoding common vowel teams���a skill aligned with standard RF 2.3. Since these students have mastered simpler CVC words, Mrs. Profile focuses on targeted instruction to address their needs.

To pinpoint the specific vowel teams causing difficulty, Mrs. Profile administers a STAR Phonics Diagnostic for vowel teams. The results suggest Javier needs additional support with the vowel teams “oi” and “aw.” While refining instruction can be challenging, this item analysis gives Mrs. Profile a clear direction on tailoring her approach and enhancing Javier���s reading skills. A few months later, her targeted intervention pays off as Javier shows significant progress.

In this scenario, Mrs. Profile used item analysis from the diagnostic assessment to provide just-right support to close phonics skills gaps and ensure Javier had the decoding skills to access grade level texts. When educators have data profiles pinpointing students��� errors, then they can deliver interventions and assign purposeful practice to prevent students from making the same mistakes (Kern & Hosp, 2018). Vowel teams? Checked off!

Scenario 3: Identifying Objectives or Standards Not Mastered

Mr. Stan R. Mastered Adjusts Alignment

Mr. Stan R. Mastered, a seventh-grade ELA teacher, reviews state assessment results and notes his students performed below the state average on standard RL 7.3, which involves analyzing interactions between story elements. This low performance is consistent across multiple years. Puzzled, Mr. Mastered investigates a released assessment question expecting it to focus on setting, but instead, the question asks what the contrasting descriptions of two towns reveal about a character’s feelings.

He realizes the question is not about identifying setting; it���s about analyzing how setting impacts the character���s emotions. His classroom activities involve identifying and describing settings���a fourth-grade skill���rather than analyzing how setting influences plot or characters, as required by the seventh-grade standard. To bridge this gap, Mr. Mastered researches strategies to align his instruction better with RL 7.3.

This scenario highlights the importance of using item analysis to identify gaps in standards mastery and ensure curricular alignment with grade-level expectations. Diagnosing misalignment allows teachers to adjust instruction to meet grade-level expectations, ensuring students spend time on appropriate, challenging tasks (Moore, Garst, & Marzano, 2015; TNTP, 2018).

One advantage of this diagnostic approach encourages deep examination of grade-level standards and facilitates cross-grade conversations to support vertical alignment (Moore, Garst, Marzano, 2015) as students often spend over 500 hours per year on assignments that are not grade-appropriate (TNTP, 2018) By refining his approach, Mr. Mastered aims to close curriculum gaps and elevate student performance. Alignment adjusted!

Scenario 4: Identifying Student Knowledge Structures

Mrs. Dee Mand Raises Rigor

Curriculum director Mrs. Dee Mand examines fifth-grade state test results and notices a puzzling outcome: only 25% of students answered one item on standard RL 5.6 correctly, while nearly 100% answered a second item correctly. The district���s mCLASS data, as well as common assessment scores suggest students mastered decoding skills.

Investigating further, she finds that both items are based on the same passage but differ in cognitive demand. The first item, a DOK level 3 question, asks, ���How does the author develop the speaker���s perspective throughout the story?��� The second, a DOK level 2 question, asks, ���How is the speaker���s perspective developed in paragraph 2?���

Realizing her district���s previous assessments only included lower-level DOK questions, Dee Mand collaborates with teachers to integrate higher-order thinking into instruction. The following year, after focusing on deeper cognitive skills, state results improve significantly: nearly 100% of students correctly answer DOK level 2 questions, and 65% meet DOK level 3 expectations���up from 25%.

This scenario illustrates how Dee Mand utilized item analysis to examine students’ knowledge structures and cognitive processing. By initially ruling out foundational skills issues through the SoR lens, she identified a gap in how instruction was addressing cognitive demand (Hess, 2018; Popham, 2020).

Cross-referencing data allowed her to pinpoint that the focus needed to shift toward teaching students to apply knowledge at higher DOK levels to enhance comprehension (Moats, Tolman, & Paulson, 2019). This approach raised test scores and increased the likelihood students would transfer their knowledge to non-routine contexts (McTighe, 2014; Steiner, 2023). Rigor raised!

Commentary and analysis

The scenarios in this series illustrate the diagnostic power of item analysis when combined with an understanding of the SoR. Each educator analyzed foundational skills, addressed skills gaps, and corrected instructional alignment to tailor interventions effectively.

Consider what Mr. D. Per did. He discovered his students had unresolved phonics gaps and did not just practice comprehension skills. Mrs. Profile used a student’s diagnostic phonics data to target support for Javier. Mr. Mastered determined his instruction was misaligned to the standards��� intent at his grade level. Finally, Dee Mand cross-referenced depth of knowledge and used knowledge structures to address rigor. Ultimately, each educator understood the Reading Rope and how to use data to improve instruction for students.

Embracing an and approach to diagnostic item analysis is an art form demanding guided practice. Such an and approach requires educators to recognize assessment should inform analysis (Salkind & Frey, 2023). Furthermore, educators should understand their context, dig into layers of data, and recognize applications and limitations of assessment results. Hence, a set of dos and don���ts in Figure 3 serves as a practical guide for navigating item analysis data in ELA instruction.

Conclusion

The tyranny of or gives way to the genius of and when educators integrate the principles of the science of reading with a diagnostic approach to assessment data analysis. By doing so, educators empower themselves to make informed decisions, tailor instruction to individual student needs, cultivate a culture of continuous improvement in ELA instruction, and increase student achievement.

Assessment results ultimately do not close reading gaps. Instead, careful, and appropriate use of assessment data can and should be leveraged to uncover why students are not meeting standards and inform the most effective instruction to close gaps and impact student achievement.

It is a research-based best practice to teach educators about the complexities involved in modern item analysis and show them how to apply it responsibly. Engaging in such a process capitalizes on teacher efficacy and enables the profession to make the best decisions for all students.

Figure 3: How to Utilize Item Analysis Data in ELA Aligned to Diagnostic Approach��

Archer, A., & Hughes, C. (2011). Explicit Instruction: Effective and Efficient Teaching. New York: Guilford Publications.

Boudett, K. P., City, E.A., & Murnane, R. J. (2013). Data wise: A step-by-step guide to using assessment results to improve teaching and learning. Harvard.

Brimijoin, K. & Tomlinson, C.A. (2003). Using data to differentiate instruction. Educational Leadership 60(5). Retrieved from https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/using-data-to-differentiate-instruction

Brookhart, S. (2023). Classroom assessment essentials. ASCD.

Brookhart, S.M. & Nitko, A.J. (2019). Educational assessment of students. (8th ed.). Pearson.

Catts, H. W. (2022). Why state reading assessments are poor benchmarks of student success. The Reading League Journal 2022(Jan-Feb). Retrieved from https://www.thereadingleague.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/JanFeb2022-TRLJ-Article.pdf

Collins, J. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. Harper Collins.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., Mattos, M., Muhammad, A. (2021). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: Providing insights for sustained, substantive school improvement. Solution Tree.

Farrell, L., Hunter, M., Davidson, M., & Osenga, T. (2020). The simple view of reading. Retrieved from https://www.readingrockets.org/article/simple-view-reading

Gareis, C.R., & Grant, L.W. (2015). Teacher-made assessments: How to connect curriculum, instruction, and student learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, Reading, and Reading Disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104

Hess, K. (2018). A local assessment toolkit to promote deeper learning: Transforming research into practice. Corwin.

Kern, A. M., & Hosp, M. K. (2018). The Status of Decoding Tests in Instructional Decision-Making. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(1), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508417749874

Knips, A., Lopez, S., Savoy, M. & LaParo, K. (2023). Equity in data: A framework for what counts in schools. ASCD.

McTighe, J. (2014). Transfer goals. Retreived from https://jaymctighe.com/downloads/Long-term-Transfer-Goals.pdf

McTighe, J. & Ferrara, S. (2024). Assessment learning by design: Principles and practices for teachers and school leaders.

Mertler, C. (2007). Interpreting standardized test-scores: Strategies for data-driven instructional decision making. Sage.

Moats, L., Tolman, C., & Paulson, L.H. (2019). LETRS (3rd ed.). Voyager Sopris.

Moore, C., Garst, L.H., & Marzano, R.J. (2015). Creating and using learning targets & performance scales: How teachers make better instructional decisions. Learning Sciences International.

Nelson, J., Perfetti, C., Liben, D., & Liben, M. (2012). Measures of text difficulty: Testing their predictive value for grade levels and student performance. Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, DC.

Ohio Department of Education (2017). Ohio���s learning standards for English Language Arts. Retrieved from https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/English-Language-Art/English-Language-Arts-Standards/ELA-Learning-Standards-2017.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US

Ohio Department of Education (2020). Ohio���s plan to raise literacy achievement. Retrieved from https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Ohios-Plan-to-Raise-Literacy-Achievement.pdf

Ohio Department of Education (2023). Implementing Ohio���s plan to raise literacy achievement, Grades K-5. Retrieved from https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Implementing-

或鞄庄看���s-永鉛温稼-岳看-檎温庄壊艶-晦庄岳艶姻温界霞-粥界鞄-1/悪-5-晦庄岳艶姻温界霞-鴛馨沿鉛艶馨艶稼岳温岳庄看稼-赫顎庄糸艶-2023.沿糸韓.温壊沿恰?鉛温稼乙=艶稼-雨皆

Popham, W. J. (2020). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (9th ed.). Pearson.

Salkind, N. & Frey, B. (2023). Tests & measurements for people who (think they) hate tests & measurements (4th ed.). Sage.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy (pp. 97���110). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Shanahan, T. (2014). How and how not to prepare students for the new tests. The Reading Teacher, 68(3), 184-188.

Shanahan, T. (2024). Should we grade students on the individual reading standards? Retrieved from https://www.shanahanonliteracy.com/blog/should-we-grade-students-on-the-individual-reading-standards-1

Sharratt, L. & Fullan, M. (2022). Putting faces on the data (10th ed.). Corwin.

Shermis, M. D. & DiVesta, F. J. (2011). Classroom assessment in action. Rowman & Littlefield.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew Effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360���407. http://www.jstor.org/stable/747612

Steiner, D. M. (2023). Nation at thought: Restoring wisdom in America���s schools. Rowman & Littlefield.

Tomlinson, C.A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms. (3rd ed.). ASCD.

TNTP. (2018). The Opportunity Myth: What Students Can Show Us About How School Is Letting Them Down���and How to Fix It. Retrieved from https://tntp.org/tntp_the-opportunity-myth_web/

Webb, N. (2006). Research monograph number 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments on mathematics and science education. Washington, D.C.: CCSSO.

The post Modern item analysis in ELA: Bridging the gap with the science of reading appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

This skepticism often arises from large-scale testing theory, which traditionally views item analysis as a tool for test developers to evaluate the quality of individual questions based on student responses (Salkind & Frey, 2023). In this context, item analysis is primarily used to refine questions for future tests or to identify and remove ambiguous items in a single test administration.

However, modern item analysis, informed by classroom assessment research���a field rooted in formative assessment, psychometric design, curriculum and instruction, and school leadership���suggests otherwise. Contemporary research indicates that well-designed items and their subsequent analysis can significantly enhance the teaching and learning cycle (Boudett, City, & Murnane, 2013; Brookhart & Nitko, 2019; Gareis & Grant, 2015; McTighe & Ferrara, 2024; Mertler, 2007; Popham, 2020; Shermis & Di Vesta, 2011).

This raises a critical question for educators: Should they follow the perspectives of the science of reading or embrace insights from classroom assessment research regarding item analysis? In this two-part series, we argue that educators need not choose one over the other but should instead adopt an integrated approach.

As Jim Collins (1994, p. 96) articulates, rather than being constrained by the “Tyranny of the OR,” educators can embrace the “Genius of the AND.” This concept involves leveraging the strengths of both perspectives���combining A AND B rather than choosing between them. We believe that educators can and should incorporate the practices of the science of reading while also utilizing insights from classroom assessment research to enhance the teaching-learning process.

We posit that there are responsible and effective ways to apply modern item analysis in ELA. Rather than dismissing it outright, especially given that the Reading Rope model includes standards directly relevant to the concerns surrounding item analysis, educators can benefit from its diagnostic potential (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Alignment of CCSS ELA Standards to Scarborough���s Reading Rope

Throughout this series, we will examine real-world scenarios where educators engage with item analyses from standards-based ELA assessments in a diagnostic manner. These scenarios align with a research-based diagnostic approach that we will outline in the following sections.

Framework for item analysis

There are five research-based approaches (see Figure 2) that educators can use to leverage item analysis data diagnostically to enhance instruction (Brookhart & Nitko, 2019).

1. Identifying Prerequisite Deficits: This approach involves pinpointing foundational concepts that students need to understand before they can benefit from further instruction. For example, if a student struggles to comprehend a passage, it may be due to difficulties with decoding skills.
2. Identifying Students��� Errors: This method focuses on identifying specific areas where students struggle, allowing educators to target instruction effectively. For instance, is the student having trouble with vowel teams or CVCe (consonant-vowel-consonant-silent e) word patterns?
3. Profiling Student Strengths and Weaknesses: This approach compares student performance within a broad learning outcome area and specific standards relative to their peers. For example, educators might assess whether all students in a particular second-grade class have mastered digraphs compared to other second-grade classes.
4. Identifying Unmastered Standards or Objectives: Here, educators use multiple data points to identify gaps in student learning. For instance, if a concept was taught but students still show difficulties, it may indicate a need for reteaching or review.
5. Identifying Student Knowledge Structures: This approach examines how students mentally organize concepts, their interrelationships, and the extent to which they can apply content knowledge to solve problems (e.g., using Webb���s Depth of Knowledge, 2006). Did instruction focus on enabling students to transfer knowledge effectively, or was it limited to recall-level understanding?

With this framework in mind, we will apply these approaches to our first scenario in this article and continue exploring three additional scenarios in the second part of this series.

Figure 2

Scenario 1: Identifying Prerequisite Deficits

Mr. Diggery D. Per Dives Below the Surface

Mr. Diggery D. Per, a fourth-grade teacher, is reviewing his spring state ELA assessment data. He feels optimistic that more fourth graders passed the assessment (32%) compared to when they were in third grade (17%). However, the low overall proficiency rates are unacceptable. During item analysis, he notices a recurring trend: students missed text comprehension questions. He decides to explore different comprehension strategies. Surely, these new strategies will improve students��� reading scores. Not so fast.

Although Mr. Per is analyzing data and utilizing evidence-based strategies (Sharratt & Fullan, 2022), the data is masking a larger issue unrelated to the comprehension interventions he is providing. Gough and Tunmer���s Simple View of Reading (1986) provides a theoretical framework where Reading Comprehension is the product of Word Recognition and Language Comprehension. If students struggle in one or both of these areas, their ability to comprehend texts will be compromised (Scarborough, 2001). Could his students have phonics gaps hindering their comprehension?

After analyzing data from a universal screener and conducting further diagnostic assessments, the answer is clear: ���Yes!��� This scenario underscores the importance of the science of reading and its focus on interconnected reading skills. Mr. Per decides to “dive below the surface” by examining universal screener and diagnostic data, revealing the true source of the comprehension issues.

By applying the prerequisite deficits approach to item analysis, Mr. Per identifies students struggling with comprehension may have phonics skills gaps. Thus, his instruction should target strengthening phonics skills to address these deficiencies. Gaps in foundational skills like phonics often manifest as poor text comprehension; if left unaddressed, they will continue to impede progress, regardless of how much focus is placed on direct comprehension strategies. As Archer & Huges articulate, there is no comprehension strategy powerful enough to compensate for the fact you can’t read the words.��� (Archer & Hughes, 2011).

This first scenario is just a quick peek at how to embrace the science of reading and modern item analysis. In our second article, we will continue to explore how to use this information in pursuit of improved reading achievement.

The post Tyranny of OR: Using modern item analysis responsibly in ELA appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

Books were banned in about half (33) of Florida’s 70 districts, though none were removed from its largest system, Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Bans accelerated in the wake of that requires schools to remove books challenged for “sexual conduct” immediately, and then conduct a review of the title.

contains some of the nation’s most banned books, such as Tricks by Ellen Hopkins, All Boys Aren’t Blue by George M. Johnson, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky, Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe and The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison.

On the move: Several superintendents elected to new posts

Florida districts also removed classics and bestsellers. Several districts pulled Kurt Vonnegut’s��Slaughterhouse Five, Richard Wright’s Native Son and Margaret Atwood’s��Handmaid’s Tale. Multiple novels by Stephen King, one of America’s most popular authors, were banned dozens of times, while best-selling fantasy author Sarah J. Maas was another frequent target.

The list of banned books from the 2022-23 school year, noted the Florida Freedom to Read Project, a coalition of parent-led groups. It contends that most book challenges come from “conservative interest groups” rather than individual parents.

“We advocate for policies that give every parent an opportunity to collaborate with their schools and educators and set unique boundaries for their own children when they feel necessary,” the organization said in a statement. “We believe in a fair, thorough, and public objection process that ensures decisions reflect the needs of each school community���not the broad, district-wide censorship we see today.”

Banned books: The bigger picture

Nationally, book bans skyrocketed by 200% during the 2023-2024 school year, with the challenges coming predominantly from far-right activists targeting stories of race, sexuality and gender identity. There were 10,046 book bans in public K12 last school year, leading to the removal of 4,231 titles by 877 authors, illustrators and translators, according to the final 2023-24 count by PEN America, an anti-censorship organization. The bans occurred in 29 states and 220 districts.

Book banning is a component of a bigger challenge facing public schools, warned Sabrina Ba棚ta, manager for PEN America���s Freedom to Read program. ���Every day, we are seeing reports of author visits and book fairs canceled, libraries shuttered for excessive book reviews and heightened scrutiny and intimidation of teachers and librarians,��� Ba棚ta concluded. ���Our book ban data is a bellwether of this broader climate.���

The post This state has banned the most books. Here’s a complete list appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

Yet, in some schools, more than 80% of students struggle with decoding and word recognition. When we see a majority of students in a school or district requiring reading interventions, we must redirect our focus from diagnosing learning issues to examining how we’re teaching reading from the start.

Dyslexia or dysteachia?

While students with dyslexia may process language differently, research shows that we can realign instructional methods to benefit most students. Rather than dyslexia, students are more apt to struggle with reading due to ���dysteachia,��� or instruction that does not align with how our brains learn to read.

Talking Out of School podcast: How to merge AI, creativity and inclusivity at FETC 2025

Unfortunately, dysteachia results in massive numbers of children who cannot read and causes districts to become so overwhelmed with providing intervention that they may inadvertently overlook the issues in general education instruction.

Even experienced educators might not recognize the misalignment. I���ve worked with district leaders reporting 60% proficiency on state reading tests who believe they’re doing well because they score similarly to districts with comparable demographics.

Yet science of reading research tells us that about 95% of all students should be able to read proficiently by fourth grade. Before pulling students out for intervention or assigning labels, evaluating our literacy practices is crucial.

Structured literacy: Ensuring effective reading instruction for all

As of August, 39 states and Washington, D.C., have passed laws requiring districts to teach reading using evidence-based instruction rooted in the science of reading, thanks to the research and advocacy efforts of the International Dyslexia Association, the Dyslexia Foundation, the National Center for Learning Disabilities and other organizations. Adopting a structured literacy approach to instruction ensures that no student falls through the cracks, regardless of their risk for dyslexia.

To be effective, structured literacy instruction must be explicit, systematic, and cumulative:

• Explicit means directly teaching students the skills we expect them to learn.
• Systematic refers to the protocol for teaching skills and the order in which they are taught.
• Cumulative means starting with the basics, building on each skill, and reinforcing previously taught skills.

Literacy skills should follow a clear scope and sequence, progressing from simple to complex. Teachers should incorporate a multisensory, multimodal approach, using resources such as sandpaper letters for tactile learning support or digital tools for reading practice. Schools also need access to reliable data to improve both individual and classroom instruction.

By providing structured literacy to all students, we can significantly reduce the number of students who need more intensive intervention and allocate more time and resources toward students with dyslexia and other learning differences. The supports the idea that by explicitly, systematically, and sequentially teaching literacy skills, teachers can give all students���including those with dyslexia���the support and tools they need to master foundational reading skills.

School districts still struggle to shift from balanced literacy to structured literacy. To successfully transition, teachers need ongoing professional learning to equip them with the necessary tools and knowledge to boost reading proficiency. At the same time, district and school leaders should identify student literacy gaps, along with opportunities to improve core instruction, before focusing on additional support and solutions.

Take a literacy health check

With this four-step literacy health checklist, K-12 school and district administrators can pinpoint areas of improvement in their literacy programs.

1. Analyze your data

• If less than 95% of your 3rd-5th-graders score below proficient on state tests, examine their foundational reading skills.
• Oral fluency rates below 90 words correct per minute could indicate weak decoding skills and a need for targeted foundational literacy support. Oral fluency rates below 75 words correct per minute point to a need for intensive intervention.
• Identify whether students scoring basic or below basic on state assessments are ready for comprehension-focused intervention or need foundational decoding support first. Striving readers may benefit from structured, multisensory instruction grounded in Orton-Gillingham principles.

2. Observe classroom practices

o Students should receive at least 150 minutes of explicit literacy instruction each week in grades K-5.
o Students in grades 6-12 should be able to read grade-level materials; if not, they could be struggling with foundational reading skills.
o Students should engage in both purposeful (skills-based) reading practice and ongoing independent reading practice in complex, connected text.

3. Review your literacy materials

• For students who have not yet mastered decoding, materials must include explicit instruction across all five pillars of reading (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension).
• Incorporate multisensory strategies for tier 3 and students with disabilities.
• Use screeners to identify students who need intervention, including those at risk of dyslexia.

4. Evaluate student access and resources

• Provide staffing for small-group or one-on-one intervention as needed.
• Determine whether reading intervention should be delivered in general classrooms to benefit all students.
• Train staff in structured literacy and multisensory strategies.
• Consider training paraprofessionals to assist with literacy instruction and intervention.

Every student deserves to grow into a confident, capable reader. By implementing effective instructional strategies, we can provide the necessary resources to all students, including those with dyslexia.

The post Rethinking dyslexia: Shifting our focus from diagnosis to instruction appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

These figures represent a decline from previous assessments, indicating that fewer students are developing the critical reading skills necessary for academic success and everyday functioning.

Several factors have contributed to the problem, such as socioeconomic disparities, limited access to preschool or early learning options, inadequate resources for schools in disadvantaged areas, inconsistent instructional methods or curriculum, and a lack of parental involvement in children’s reading development. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted education, with prolonged school closures and the shift to remote learning disrupting the traditional learning environment.

FETC 2025: How esports is building strong communities

The implications of low literacy rates among American youth are far-reaching. Being literate opens doors, fosters a sense of confidence, independence, and belonging. However, students who struggle to read are likely to encounter difficulties across all subjects, limiting their academic achievement and opportunity. If this trend continues, the future workforce and overall socio-economic health of the nation are at risk.

Regardless of how we arrived at this point, we have to stop diverting attention from the real problem. School leaders and lawmakers need to continue to advocate for high-quality early childhood education and adequate funding to ensure that schools���particularly in underserved communities���have the resources to support literacy.

Rationalizing, blaming the test or comparing schools or states to one another diminishes the urgency. It���s time to stop making excuses, to clearly define this as a crisis, and address youth literacy in a multifaceted and systemic approach.

Evaluating and adjusting

At the school-level, teachers need access to resources that enable them to effectively teach literacy skills. , which provides a framework and strategies to improve literacy skills, is an example of a resource that can ensure instructional practices are aligned with research about how students learn to read. Access to professional development opportunities, support from literacy specialists and access to assessment tools to monitor and address individual student progress are also essential.

Shared commitments among the teaching staff regarding the curriculum and methods are also necessary in order to ensure consistency and efficacy. When teachers collaborate and adhere to common goals, strategies and assessments, they create a consistent and supportive learning environment across grade levels and classrooms.

This alignment helps to identify and address individual student needs more effectively, as teachers can share insights and resources, ensuring that no student falls through the cracks. Moreover, this ���deprivatizing��� of practice promotes professional growth among educators, as they learn from each other’s experiences and expertise, ultimately leading to improved teaching practices and better student outcomes.

Additionally, regular and meaningful progress monitoring must be in place in order to systematically track students’ reading development and tailor instruction to meet individual needs. Regular assessment provides data-driven insights into each student’s progress, enabling timely interventions that can prevent minor difficulties from becoming significant obstacles.

By continuously evaluating and adjusting instructional strategies based on accurate and current information, educators can foster an inclusive learning environment where all students, regardless of their starting point, have the opportunity to achieve reading proficiency.

Empowering principals in youth literacy

Lastly, we must embrace the critical role of the principal. This is not intended to diminish the role of the classroom teacher or staff who provide individualized support and interventions���each of those roles are also important. But in addition to empowering staff, visiting classrooms and providing support, the principal alone holds the authority to define and monitor indicators of effective instruction, ensuring consistency and alignment through clear “look fors” and agreed upon best instructional practices.

Moreover, as the sole spokesperson for the instructional program, it is the principal who has the opportunity to communicate the urgency of the problem, to call in all voices, nurture collaboration to align efforts, and build collective efficacy necessary to solve the problem.

With large percentages of students lacking proficiency in reading, the stakes are high and our behaviors and mindsets about literacy have to shift from traditional practices to a more unified, systemic approach. By providing teachers with essential resources, fostering shared commitments, being intentional about progress monitoring and empowering principals as instructional leaders, we can create the conditions necessary for every child to succeed.

The post Youth literacy: How to take a systems approach appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

There were 10,046 book bans in public K12 last school year,�� leading to the removal of 4,231 titles by 877 authors, illustrators and translators, according to the final 2023-24 count by PEN America, an anti-censorship organization. The bans occurred in 29 states and 220 districts.

Jodi Picoult���s Nineteen Minutes, a 2007 novel about a school shooting, was the most commonly banned book, the organization found. Picoult told PEN America that she doesn’t consider having the most banned book in the country any kind of badge of honor but rather a call for alarm.

Talking Out of School podcast : How to elevate edtech

���Nineteen Minutes is banned not because it���s about a school shooting, but because of a single page that depicts a date rape and uses anatomically correct words for the human body. It is not gratuitous or salacious, and it is not���as the book banners claim���porn,” the best-selling author said. “In fact, hundreds of kids have told me that reading Nineteen Minutes stopped them from committing a school shooting, or showed them they were not alone in feeling isolated.”

The next most banned titles were: Looking for Alaska by John Green, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky, Sold by Patricia McCormick and Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher.

Books bans become more severe

PEN America, which has tracked nearly 16,000 book bans since 2021, also warned that censorship is growing in severity. Last school year, 43% of the bans completely prohibited access to books, without review or exceptions. Total bans accounted for only 27% of the censorship activity in previous years.

Along with themes of race, sexuality and gender identity, a growing number of banned books “depict topics young people confront in the real world, including experiences with substance abuse, suicide, depression and mental health concerns, and sexual violence,” PEN America observed.

“The passage of time when you���re in 6th grade or 11th grade is very fast���with much to learn about,” Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America���s Freedom to Read program, said. “What students can read in schools provides the foundation for their lives, whether critical thinking, empathy across difference, personal well-being or long-term success.���

Florida and Iowa banned the most books during the 2023-2024 school year, with the former removing more than 4,500 titles and the latter, 3,600. Other states that saw more than 100 book bans include Texas (538), Wisconsin (408), Virginia (121) and�� Kentucky (100). In Wisconsin, Virginia and Kentucky, five or fewer school districts did all of the banning, PEN America noted.

Stephen King, Sarah J. Maas and Ellen Hopkins also among the most frequently banned authors. Some 74 of King’s books were removed, compared to 22 for Maas and 19 by Hopkins.

Book banning is a component of a bigger challenge facing public schools, warned Sabrina Ba棚ta, manager for PEN America’s Freedom to Read program. “Every day we are seeing reports of author visits and book fairs canceled, libraries shuttered for excessive book reviews and heightened scrutiny and intimidation of teachers and librarians,” Ba棚ta concluded. “Our book ban data is a bellwether of this broader climate.���

The post Book bans are surging after last school year appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

Just this year, for instance, requiring students to become proficient in cursive writing by the end of fifth grade���and Iowa���s state education board writing to its list of educational requirements.

These measures bring the total number of states mandating the teaching of cursive writing in elementary schools to 24 as of July. That number could be even higher soon, as similar legislation is pending in Connecticut, Maine, Missouri and Pennsylvania.

Talking Out of School podcast : Why is a ���small-language model��� better for K12?

Cursive writing instruction largely disappeared over the last few decades as states focused their attention on improving reading and math skills, first in the era of No Child Left Behind and then as they adopted the Common Core standards. Now, however, cursive instruction is making a major comeback in schools from coast to coast.

What���s behind this resurgence, even as more students are using laptops and tablets to complete their work? There is mounting evidence to show that learning to form letters by hand leads to better spelling, thinking, reading, and writing skills���and the effects are more profound when students learn how to write in cursive.

Writing in cursive not only stimulates synapses in the brain related to learning; it also activates both hemispheres of the brain simultaneously, something that printing alone doesn���t do.

In one study published in January 2024, researchers in Norway compared the neurological effects of writing by hand with typing on a keyboard and found handwriting was associated with ���far more elaborate��� brain activity than keyboard writing.

���With handwriting, you have to form these intricate letters by making finely controlled hand and finger movements,��� Audrey van der Meer, one of the study���s authors, . Each letter requires a different hand motion, she explained, and the act of forming a letter activates distinctive memories and brain pathways tied to what that letter represents���such as the sound it makes and the words that include it.

But when students type out their words, every letter is produced by the same simple finger movement, so they don���t derive this benefit. What���s more, the act of connecting letters together when students write in cursive helps them form powerful connections between these letters in their minds. It reinforces the idea that these letters are interconnected within the word and helps them develop automaticity and fluency in their reading and writing.

As Ohio State University Professor Mary Jo Fresch points out: ���Students must think across the word they intend to write, so gaining fluency as they connect cursive letters supports metacognitive skills. By ���picturing��� the word, students use their morphological knowledge in meaningful ways.���

Cursive writing was once seen as taking away valuable instructional time from subjects like math and literacy. Now, as we learn more about how the brain works, it appears the opposite is true. And with science-based programs that make cursive instruction fun for students and easy for schools to implement, students can learn and practice both handwriting and literacy skills at the same time with minimal prep time for teachers.

Teaching kids how to write in cursive again won���t just help them decipher their grandparents��� letters. It���s also a smart strategy for activating young students��� minds and improving their ability to read. And with achievement gaps only growing wider as a result of the pandemic, schools need all the help they can get in solving the literacy challenge.

The post Why cursive instruction is now looping back around appeared first on District 91心頭istration.

“When I went to school, media literacy looked like being able to read a newspaper, understand what we were being told, maybe verify that with a second or maybe third source,” Camhi notes. “But the abundance of information that’s out there requires that we teach students how to know the difference between factual information and other people’s version of that.”

Media literacy begins in sixth grade English language arts and social studies in the Baldwin Union Free School District. High school seniors can take a college-level civics news literacy course that is credited through Stony Brook University.

What to know for the week: 4 important reasons smartphone bans work

“Our kids sit around the dinner table with their families, having these political discussions, and so I dare say that they probably influence the thinking in their families and in their communities,” she continues. “It’s not a skill that you can learn overnight. It’s a skill you have to grow up with.”

Media literacy is a hot topic during an election season but it’s a skill students need throughout their daily lives on- and offline, Camhi adds.

“It’s about the clothes that you buy. It’s about the friends that you keep. It’s about your community and the local newspaper. It’s about everything,” she explains. “The election is sort of the cherry on the top. I mean, it’s like the peak of the mountain. But knowing that what you read or hear is true, and being able to decipher your opinions and your beliefs based on real information, is paramount to everything that we do all the time.”

Listen to the podcast below, or on , or .

The post “Talking Out of School”: Why media literacy now matters so much appeared first on District 91心頭istration.