(Collected and compiled by Mai White)
A/ FROM DR JENNY DONOVAN
Dr. Jenny Donovan is the inaugural CEO of the Australian Education Research Organisation. Prior to this role, she established and led the Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation (CESE) as Executive Director for 8 years. Dr. Donovan began her career as a high school teacher in Sydney’s western suburbs. She has worked in a number of education roles in operational and policy areas, including some years as Deputy Director of a not-for-profit education assessment agency at the University of New South Wales.
In 2024, she was a member of Professor Mark Scott’s Teacher Education Expert Panel which delivered recommendations for reform to Initial Teacher Education that were accepted by Australia’s education Ministers. As a result, an evidence-based core curriculum will be implemented in all initial teacher education. Jenny holds a Bachelor of Arts with a Diploma of Education from Macquarie University, MA (Hons) from UNSW and a PhD in history from the University of Sydney.
ARE WE THERE YET? THE LONG AND WINDING ROAD TO EVIDENCE – BASED PRACTICE IN AUSTRALIAN EDUCATION
Now is the time for reflection and bold decision-making—decisions grounded in data, informed by experience, and shaped by the collective wisdom of educators, leaders, and communities. We must confront what our teaching still lacks, not with blame but with clarity and urgency. Teaching for impact requires more than policy; it demands system-level and school-level action, with a heavy emphasis on approaches that work—like explicit teaching and structured phonics instruction, especially for those facing disadvantage or learning difficulties. But we must also challenge the dominance of evidence-based practice when it becomes rigid and exclusionary. Evidence must evolve, be interrogated, and applied with care and context. A statistic without a story is not enough. We need leaders who listen, advocates who amplify—parents, journalists, practitioners—who use persuasive, compassionate language to remind us that we are teaching children, not just content. Every child deserves to have their curiosity nurtured, their individuality valued, and their learning supported—every lesson, every day. Equity must not be a slogan but a practice. From where we stand, we are closer than we have ever been. Now is the moment to act.
An explanation of the model
This model links elements of student learning processes to associated teaching practices in 4 key areas:
- To align with the evidence that learning is a change in long-term memory, teachers develop a teaching and learning plan for the knowledge students will acquire.
- To align with the evidence that students process limited amounts of new information, teachers manage the cognitive load of learning tasks.
- To align with the evidence on how students develop and demonstrate mastery, teachers maximise retention, consolidation and application of learning.
- To align with the evidence that students are actively engaged when learning, teachers foster the conditions of a learning-focused environment.
This fourth essential element wraps around the other elements of the model, recognising that:
- engagement and learning have a reciprocal relationship
- students learn best in safe and supportive learning environments.
The model recognises that:
- all students benefit from evidence-based practices that align with the mechanisms of memory that allow for acquiring, retaining, retrieving and consolidating learning
- the frequency, intensity and duration of scaffolding and guidance provided may differ to meet students’ needs.
This model aligns with Australian Professional Standards for Teachers 1.2: Understand how students learn. Teachers at all career stages can use this model and the related overview of how students learn to affirm, extend or improve their current practice by:
- developing their understanding and use of research into how students learn
- reviewing the structure of their teaching programs using research evidence
- evaluating the effectiveness of teaching practices in their schools to identify opportunities to have a greater impact for all of their students.
Leaders can also use the learning and teaching model to develop a common language and shared understanding of how students learn, and to ensure policies and programs are aligned with this evidence to maximise learning for all students.
B/ DR LINDA SIEGEL, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (CANADA)
The Right to Read: A Matter of Justice, Urgency, and Action
Reading is not just a skill—it is a fundamental human right. Yet for too many children, especially those from disadvantaged, ethnic, or language minority backgrounds, this right remains unrealized. Despite clear evidence showing that early identification and intervention can prevent most reading difficulties, these practices are rarely implemented. Instead, costly and delayed diagnoses—like those for dyslexia—leave children struggling in silence, often leading to deep emotional and social harm. Shockingly, 75% to 95% of individuals in prison have significant reading difficulties—proof that literacy failure is not just an education issue but a social justice crisis. Curriculum must do more than outline goals—it must actively identify students at risk and guide immediate, evidence-based responses. Whole language or “balanced” literacy approaches, though widely used, have failed many, and the financial cost of continuing these ineffective methods is enormous. Teacher autonomy is vital, but it cannot override the proven need for structured, explicit reading instruction grounded in the science of reading. Meanwhile, parents are often belittled or ignored, and teachers undervalued—when in truth, they are key allies in change. To make reading a right for every child, we must challenge policy inertia, amplify voices of those affected, and ensure programs like MultiLit are widely accessible. Literacy is liberation. We are overdue for action.
This body of research challenges the use of IQ scores in defining and distinguishing learning disabilities, particularly dyslexia. Studies found that children with dyslexia and those labeled as poor readers (based on IQ-consistent low achievement) perform similarly in reading, spelling, phonological processing, language, and memory tasks—indicating no meaningful cognitive distinction between the two groups. Both experience significant deficits, regardless of IQ. Additional analysis of Canadian practices reveals that special education services vary widely across regions, are influenced by cultural and linguistic diversity, and often lack support for preschoolers and adults. Despite these challenges, Canada’s strengths lie in its publicly funded, collaborative, and child-centered approach. Overall, evidence suggests that IQ testing is not essential for identifying learning disabilities, as reading difficulties occur across the IQ spectrum and share similar underlying deficits.
1. The Right to Read Is a Human Right
Professor Linda Siegel argues that the right to read should be treated as a fundamental human right. Reading is not a privilege reserved for the academically gifted but a necessity for full participation in society. Denying children proper access to reading instruction—especially those with learning disabilities like dyslexia—is a form of discrimination. Her work advocates for early intervention, evidence-based instruction, and teacher training to ensure that no child is left behind in literacy.
2. Dyslexia Is a Learning Difference, Not a Lack of Intelligence
Through decades of research, Linda Siegel has demonstrated that dyslexia is not linked to low IQ. Many children with dyslexia have average or above-average intelligence. The real issue lies in how reading difficulties are identified and addressed. She challenges outdated practices that require an “IQ-achievement discrepancy” before students can receive help, emphasizing that intervention should be based on need, not on arbitrary test scores.
3. Early Intervention Matters
Siegel’s research consistently shows that the earlier reading difficulties are identified and addressed, the better the outcomes for children. Waiting until a child is significantly behind their peers can lead to emotional distress, lowered self-esteem, and long-term academic challenges. Her studies highlight that targeted support in phonological awareness, decoding, and language skills in the early years can dramatically reduce the incidence and severity of reading disabilities.
4. Support for English Language Learners (ELLs)
Linda Siegel has also contributed to understanding how children learning English as a second language (ESL/ELL) develop reading skills. Her work stresses that ELLs are often misidentified as having learning disabilities when in fact they may simply need more targeted language instruction. She emphasizes that appropriate assessment and support strategies can help these learners succeed without stigmatizing them.
5. Science-Based Literacy Instruction Works
Siegel champions instructional methods that are backed by scientific evidence, particularly structured literacy programs that emphasize phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension strategies. Her research indicates that these approaches benefit not only students with dyslexia but all learners. For her, the path forward lies in using data to inform practice and ensuring that every child receives the tools they need to learn to read.
Key Takeaway for Teachers: Linda S. Siegel’s Argument Against the Use of IQ Tests in Learning Disability (LD) Identification
Linda S. Siegel argues that intelligence test scores should not be used in the definition or analysis of learning disabilities (LDs). Her main points are:
- IQ-Achievement Discrepancy Is Illogical: Using a discrepancy between IQ and achievement to define LD is flawed. It assumes that IQ accurately measures a child’s potential, which is both unproven and biased—especially against children with learning disabilities.
- IQ Tests Don’t Measure “Potential”: IQ is often mistakenly equated with innate ability or learning potential. Siegel questions this assumption, especially since some children read above their measured IQ levels—contradicting the idea that IQ limits reading ability.
- No Meaningful Difference in LD Based on IQ: Research shows that children with reading disabilities do not differ significantly in cognitive processes based on whether they have high or low IQs. This challenges the need to categorize LDs using IQ.
- IQ Tests May Be Biased Against Poor Readers: Because many IQ tests include tasks that are language-heavy, they can disadvantage children with reading difficulties—leading to misleading or unfair assessments.
- Educational Focus Should Shift: Instead of relying on IQ, educators should focus on direct assessments of academic skills and cognitive processes that are relevant to learning, such as phonological awareness or working memory.
Conclusion for Teachers: The use of IQ scores in LD identification is problematic and unnecessary. Teachers and psychologists should focus on specific learning needs and intervention planning rather than relying on IQ-achievement discrepancies. This ensures a fairer, more accurate identification of students who need support.
C/ DR JONATHAN SOLITY, DIRECTOR, OPTIMA PSYCHOLOGY AND HONORARY LECTURER, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON (UK)
Dr. Jonathan Solity’s keynote “Sold a Story: Teaching Reading Through Synthetic Phonics and Decodable Texts in the UK” critically examines the trajectory of reading instruction shaped by government mandates. Tracing the UK’s journey through five policy phases—from the early “Reading Wars” and National Literacy Strategy to the DfE’s rigid “phonics first, fast, and only” approach—Solity highlights the dangers of adherence to a single method, regardless of evidence. As Director of Optima Psychology and an Honorary Lecturer at UCL, his school-based research questions the efficacy of synthetic phonics and the limitations of tools like the Phonics Screening Check. He argues that effective teaching depends not just on content but on how learning is structured, advocating for differentiated, whole-class instruction over one-size-fits-all solutions. His work calls for a more flexible, evidence-informed approach—offering essential insights for Australia amid its own reading instruction debates.
Dr. Jonathan Solity’s Key Views on Teaching Reading:
1. Critique of Synthetic Phonics-Only Approaches:
Dr. Solity challenges the widespread adoption of systematic synthetic phonics (SSP) and the use of decodable texts as the exclusive route to teaching reading in the UK. He argues that strict adherence to a single method—no matter how evidence-based—can be limiting and even harmful to literacy development.
2. The “Reading Wars” and Instructional Psychology:
Solity’s approach stems from instructional psychology, which focuses on how teaching practices and environments affect learning. He emphasizes that:
- Learning to read involves more than just decoding.
- Children benefit from exposure to real books and authentic language, not just decodable readers.
- Effective teaching should be differentiated, based on learner needs, and not rigidly tied to ideology.
3. The Optima Reading Programme:
Solity developed the Optima Reading Programme (previously ERR and KRM), which:
- Uses whole-class instruction.
- Is grounded in psychological theory.
- Emphasizes frequent, short lessons with high engagement.
- Incorporates both phonics and high-frequency word (HFW) instruction by sight.
- Focuses on early success for both low and high achievers.
- Encourages a love of literature, not just decoding practice.
4. Opposition to Certain Government Policies:
He has been critical of:
- The Phonics Screening Check used in England.
- The Department for Education’s (DfE) “phonics first, fast and only” mantra.
- The DfE’s 16 core criteria, which reject mixed methods like teaching HFWs by sight.
5. Teaching High-Frequency Words (HFWs) by Sight:
Solity supports teaching the most common 100 English words as whole words (not phonetically decoded), based on research suggesting this enhances fluency. This contrasts with phonics-only approaches, which view this method as confusing or contradictory to decoding instruction.
6. Real Books vs. Decodable Texts:
Unlike SSP advocates, Solity questions the heavy reliance on decodable readers, which he feels do not reflect the richness of natural language. He promotes the use of real books from early on, helping children see the joy and purpose of reading.
7. Balanced, Evidence-Based Instruction:
He promotes a balanced literacy approach, informed by extensive classroom research and real-world outcomes, rather than political mandates. His goal is to reduce reading failure by using what actually works across diverse classroom settings.
What we have learnt:
Dr. Jonathan Solity’s work argues for flexibility, evidence-based practice, and respect for learner diversity in reading instruction. He sees the overemphasis on synthetic phonics and decodable texts as overly narrow, and potentially harmful to developing fluent, confident readers. His Optima programme offers an alternative based on psychology, early success, and engagement with real texts—an approach he believes can more effectively close literacy gaps.
Here are practical takeaways for teachers from the article “Instructional psychology and teaching reading: Ending the reading wars” and the discussion of the Optima Reading Programme:
Core Instructional Principles for Teachers
- Whole-class, inclusive teaching
Teach phonics and reading to the whole class—low and high achievers can succeed together. - Daily, short, consistent lessons (“little and often”)
Use short, frequent, and pacy sessions that follow a familiar structure but build cumulatively. - Teach key phonics skills: blending and segmenting
Focus on oral and written blending/segmenting before and alongside print. - Model explicitly: “I do, we do, you do”
Use direct instruction—demonstrate first, practice with the class, then allow independent try. - Incorporate writing into reading lessons
Link reading and writing to reinforce phoneme-grapheme knowledge.
Effective Teaching Techniques
- Use multisensory activities
Combine visual (letters), auditory (sounds), and kinaesthetic (finger spelling, phoneme frames) tools. - Prioritise decodable texts over look-and-say books
Use books where most words match taught GPCs. Avoid relying on guessing or memorising. - Teach high-frequency words (HFWs) through phonics, not sight
Help children decode tricky HFWs by analysing sound structure and highlighting irregular parts. - Include oral language work daily
Reinforce phonics with oral rehearsal (e.g., robot talk) before using print. - Make lessons interactive and engaging
Use rhythm, songs, actions, quick games, and partner work to keep energy high and behaviour positive.
Programme Design Considerations
- Start with consistent GPCs; gradually build complexity
Focus first on the most reliable phoneme-grapheme correspondences. - Provide repeated, structured practice
Rehearse known material while slowly adding new content. - Track student progress regularly and adjust
Use quick assessments or observations to identify who needs additional support. - Avoid mixed strategies in early reading
Don’t confuse children with simultaneous phonics + whole-word/sight reading approaches.
These principles are backed by research from both instructional psychology and large-scale classroom results. Teachers using systematic synthetic phonics with decodable texts and oral-visual-kinesthetic integration are more likely to see strong progress in early readers—including struggling or vulnerable students.
D/ DR RHONA STAINTHORP OBE, PROFESSOR EMERITA, UNIVERSITY OF READING (UK): TEACHING PHONICS AND BEYOND: A CASE STUDY FROM ENGLAND
A high-quality literacy hour that includes systematic, direct teaching of reading—especially phonics—is essential for all primary children. Resources like Progression in Phonics and Letters and Sounds offer structured approaches, with the latter being a free, synthetic phonics programme available to all schools, though it lacks accompanying materials. Despite national support such as phonics roadshows and one-day trainings (especially in underperforming areas), studies like PIRLS and phonics screening checks reveal that many teachers still have insecure subject knowledge in phonics. Strengthening this knowledge through targeted, ongoing professional development is crucial, as systematic phonics teaching remains one of the most effective ways to boost early reading outcomes.
Key Takeaways for Teachers – What We’ve Learned About Phonics and Reading Instruction:
- Phonics Works: In the past 20 years, teaching phonics in England has improved reading outcomes. Systematic synthetic phonics (SSP) is now the starting point for teaching children how to read words.
- Training Matters: Many teachers still lack strong subject knowledge in phonics. One-day training and phonics roadshows helped improve understanding, but follow-up training and support are still needed.
- Start Early: Early assessment like the Phonics Screening Check (PSC) helps identify struggling readers by Year 2, allowing early intervention within the classroom.
- Not Just Phonics: Phonics is necessary but not enough. Teachers must also focus on reading comprehension. The Simple View of Reading (SVR)—which combines word recognition and understanding—is the recommended framework.
- Evidence-Based Teaching: Research shows reading involves two main routes: phonics (sounding out) and whole-word recognition (memory and meaning). Good teaching builds both skills.
- Whole-School Approach: Schools need a clear, consistent approach to phonics teaching and assessing progress, so interventions are timely and effective.
- Empowered Teachers: Teachers need to understand why phonics works—not just how to follow a programme. Without understanding, they can’t adapt teaching for different learners.
- Closing the Gap: Results from PIRLS (international reading study) suggest the achievement gap is closing, especially for children who were previously underperforming.
Key Takeaways for Teachers to Learn from Rhona
- Value of Education and Access:
Rhona benefited from a time when education was freely accessible and highly valued, a privilege not all generations share. This underscores the importance of supporting equitable access to education today. - Critical View of Social Context:
Societal and political climates (e.g., Brexit’s divisiveness) impact education and social cohesion. Teachers play a role in fostering critical thinking and empathy to build a better future. - Lifelong Learning and Adaptability:
Rhona’s journey shows that learning doesn’t end—she continued lecturing, supervising, and researching well into her later years while embracing new activities like Tai Chi and triathlons. - Research Motivation Rooted in Real Classroom Challenges:
Early teaching experience with diverse learners lacking adequate support motivated Rhona to seek research-based answers to improve reading instruction. - Importance of Evidence-Based Reading Instruction:
Contrary to the “Whole Language” approach dominant in the 70s-80s, Rhona’s work and research show children must be explicitly taught how to read words, especially through phonics and phonemic awareness. - Collaborative Research and Intellectual Curiosity:
Rhona credits her influences (Max Coltheart, Maggie Snowling, Morag Stuart) for their curiosity, insightful questioning, and collaborative spirit—qualities vital for advancing knowledge. - Phonemic Awareness as Key to Reading Success:
Her longitudinal studies of precocious readers showed that explicit phonemic awareness is necessary and predictive for learning to read alphabetic scripts successfully. - Teacher Training is Crucial:
Teachers themselves need strong phonemic awareness to teach phonics effectively. Teacher preparation programs must ensure trainees gain this foundational skill. - Focus on Writing as the Next Frontier:
While reading research has advanced, Rhona urges a stronger focus on writing research and instruction, since writing skills critically influence students’ life chances and academic success. - Barriers to Improvement in Reading Instruction:
The main challenges remain inadequate teacher knowledge and outdated training methods, which must be addressed to improve reading outcomes.
E/ PANEL DISCUSSION – LEADING CHANGE IN SCHOOL SYSTEMS
In the panel discussion on leading change in school systems, Patrick Ellis, Elissa Baker, and Jennifer White emphasized the importance of strategically re-prioritizing school resources—especially space and budget—to address multiple urgent needs. They highlighted the necessity of recognizing both school leaders and support staff in driving change. A flexible approach to professional development (PD), grounded in literacy assessment and ongoing data analysis, was advocated to guide classroom instruction improvements. Structured coaching, transparent sharing of system data, and celebrating incremental progress are critical, even though change may feel slow. The panel acknowledged that while teachers often focus on delivering syllabus content, effective classroom management, routines, and instruction techniques require equal attention. Early and targeted support, particularly for younger teachers, helps break down key techniques and shifts habits, which can be more challenging for experienced teachers. Ultimately, supporting leaders to empower all teachers to teach effectively is essential for sustainable system-wide improvement.
F/ SARAH RICHARDSON , program director, australian education research organisation (AERO)
UNDERSTANDING AND SUPPORTING STUDENTS’ DIVERSE NEEDS: EVIDENCE – BASED APPROACHES
Understanding how students learn is essential for effective teaching. While students share common cognitive processes—such as building on prior knowledge, focusing attention, and transferring learning into long-term memory—various factors influence their ability to absorb new information. Working memory is limited, and distractions, misconceptions, or stress can interfere with learning and engagement. Teachers can maximize learning by breaking down complex tasks into manageable chunks, explicitly teaching foundational knowledge, and providing clear explanations and demonstrations. It’s important to establish consistent classroom routines and recognize that students learn best when they care about and pay attention to the material. Because students have different backgrounds and capacities, teaching must be flexible and responsive, offering high-quality Tier 1 instruction and targeted Tier 2 and 3 interventions when needed. Modeling, supporting, and fostering a safe, controlled environment helps students build independence and confidence. Ultimately, understanding these learning mechanisms allows teachers to provide equitable, effective instruction that meets diverse student needs and supports their success.
SUPPORT STUDENTS’ DIVERSE NEEDS — Key Points for Teachers
1. Importance of Support
- Teachers’ support is essential to provide all students access to safe, supportive, and well-managed learning environments.
- Students have varied strengths and needs; not all with additional needs have formal diagnoses.
- Reasonable adjustments to environment, teaching, and curriculum should be made collaboratively with students, families, specialists, and support staff.
2. Types of Support Students May Need
- Accessing curriculum on an equal basis.
- Emotional regulation (managing feelings like frustration, anxiety).
- Adjustments for sensory sensitivities (noise, light, touch, smells).
- Support with social interactions and communication (verbal and non-verbal).
- Assistance with physical needs, personal care, and health.
- Help understanding and processing information.
- Support for language acquisition (e.g., Standard Australian English).
3. Collaborative Planning and Regular Review
- Identify students’ preferences, strengths, and needs through consultation with students, parents/caregivers, and professionals.
- Make reasonable adjustments in advance and review them regularly.
- Protect students’ privacy and comfort in discussions.
4. Effective Planning Practices
- Identify individual learning objectives based on needs.
- Organize and implement supports and reasonable adjustments.
- Monitor and celebrate progress, and adjust plans accordingly.
- Maintain positive, collaborative relationships with students and their support networks.
- Create culturally safe and inclusive environments where all students understand and respect differences.
5. Understanding Student Behaviour
- Recognize behaviour as communication; disruptive behaviours often serve a function (e.g., avoidance, seeking attention, expressing emotions).
- Emotional regulation difficulties can reduce students’ comprehension and self-expression.
- Use consistent classroom expectations, rules, and routines for all students, with extra support where needed.
6. Behaviour Support and Analysis
- Assess which routines and interactions work well for students.
- Use simple strategies for low-level behaviours; seek leadership support for more serious behaviours.
- Collaborate with support staff for further assessment and planning.
- Use tools like Antecedent-Behaviour-Consequence (ABC) analysis to identify triggers and functions of behaviours.
- Record detailed behavioural observations systematically to inform support planning.
7. Teaching and Instruction Adjustments
- Provide learning content at an appropriate level.
- Use effective teaching strategies tailored to students’ needs to reduce frustration and support emotional regulation.
Key Points for Teachers: Supporting Students with Diverse Needs
1. Observe and Analyze Behaviour Patterns
- After completing an ABC (Antecedent-Behaviour-Consequence) chart, review for patterns:
- When and during which activities does the behaviour occur or not occur?
- What happens before and after the behaviour?
- Discuss findings with students, parents/caregivers, and specialists.
- Support students in processing and communicating their experiences.
- Use insights to create strategies, e.g., step-by-step guides or respectful ways to get attention.
2. Understand and Support Use of Assistive Technology
- Identify students’ strengths, needs, and preferences related to assistive devices.
- Learn how assistive equipment is used by consulting all involved (students, families, professionals).
- Plan practical use, storage, maintenance, and effectiveness of devices.
- Monitor and adjust technology use to improve student support and independence.
3. Assess Literacy and Numeracy Skills
- Screen early to identify students needing support.
- Provide access to academic content even if functional literacy is not yet achieved.
- Collaborate with school leadership to implement whole-school screening and support.
4. Set Learning Objectives Based on Individual Needs
- Include academic, emotional regulation, social, and communication goals.
- Objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, functional, and documented in individual plans.
- Involve students and families in setting and reviewing goals.
- Plan whole-class instruction to align with diverse learning objectives.
5. Plan and Organize Supports and Reasonable Adjustments
- Use research-based strategies leveraging students’ strengths and interests.
- Regularly plan, review, and adjust supports (daily, weekly, termly, yearly).
- Create safe, supportive environments with clear expectations and routines.
- Adjust physical environment and equipment as needed.
- Support communication, emotional regulation, social responses, and physical/sensory differences.
- Consider classroom layout, noise, lighting, and sensory factors.
- Explicitly teach literacy and numeracy across subjects with appropriate supports.
- Use multiple presentation modes and alternative ways for students to demonstrate learning.
- Coordinate with families regarding absences for therapy or treatment.
6. Monitor, Review, and Celebrate Student Progress
- Collect data from assessments and discussions with all stakeholders.
- Revise learning objectives and instructional strategies as needed.
- Use real examples of student attempts to track progress.
- Share successes with students, families, and support teams.
- Use ongoing assessment data for reporting and collaborative planning.
7. Reflect on Practice
- Identify professional learning needs to better support diverse learners.
- Ensure careful assessment of student strengths and needs.
- Collaborate to set measurable, achievable objectives.
- Plan and adjust supports appropriately.
- Systematically monitor and review progress for continuous improvement.
F/DR STEVE GRAHAM: EVIDENCE BASED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TEACHING WRITING, ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY, STEVE.GRAHAM@ASU.EDU
Effective writing instruction involves more than just having students write; it requires explicit teaching of foundational skills like handwriting, spelling, grammar, and sentence construction, alongside strategies for planning, revising, and editing. To engage students, writing should serve real purposes across the curriculum—such as writing about science or collecting data—and be supported by clear, personalized goals. Traditional feedback on student writing can be exhausting and ineffective if students don’t engage with it, so fostering dialogue and encouraging self-monitoring strategies helps students become more independent writers. Incorporating creativity, critical thinking, and modern tools—including AI like ChatGPT—can enhance motivation and skill development. Ultimately, connecting reading and writing instruction and creating a motivating environment are key to helping students improve as writers.
Key Takeaways for Teaching Writing Effectively
Recent assessments show that two-thirds of U.S. eighth graders write at a basic or below-basic level. To improve writing instruction, research from meta-analyses and studies of expert teachers highlights five essential practices: write, teach, support, connect, and create.
- Write: Students need frequent, meaningful writing opportunities—ideally 20 more minutes daily—to boost proficiency and reading comprehension. Encourage writing for real audiences and purposes, and include cycles of planning, drafting, and revising.
- Teach: Explicitly teach foundational skills (handwriting, spelling, sentence construction) and strategic writing processes like planning, revising, and editing. Use strategies such as sentence combining and STOP & DARE for argument writing. Build vocabulary across general, genre-specific, and content-area words. Strengthen transcription skills to free cognitive load and teach writing knowledge by exposing students to model texts and writing structures.
- Support: Provide clear, specific goals and scaffold writing with peer collaboration, graphic organizers, and varied feedback (teacher, peer, self-assessment). Use technology tools to aid writing. Feedback should be manageable, constructive, and celebrate progress.
- Connect: Link reading and writing instruction. Using writing to deepen reading comprehension—through summaries, notes, and responses—improves both skills significantly.
- Create: Foster a motivating writing environment where students feel safe to take risks and see their efforts valued. Share your own writing, offer choices, praise effort, publish student work, and set realistic yet challenging goals.
By integrating these evidence-based approaches, teachers can elevate student writing proficiency and motivation in meaningful, measurable ways.
Key Takeaway for Teachers: Effective Writing Instruction
- Regular Practice with Purpose
Students need frequent writing practice, but writing a lot alone isn’t enough—explicit teaching of writing strategies is essential. - Provide Guided Support
Support students throughout the writing process—help them set goals, generate ideas, plan, draft, revise, edit, and publish their work. - Teach Foundational Skills
Explicitly teach handwriting, spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and vocabulary to help students write fluently and clearly. - Teach Writing Strategies
Show students how to plan, draft, monitor, revise, and proofread their writing through direct modeling and guided practice. - Encourage Creativity and Critical Thinking
Teach craft moves (like similes, metaphors) and foster analytical thinking to improve idea generation and editing skills. - Teach Summary Writing
Help students learn how to identify main ideas and write concise summaries—an essential skill across subjects. - Build Writing Knowledge
Expand students’ understanding of writing genres, audience, purpose, and writing processes by using mentor texts and discussions. - Use Modern Technology
Incorporate word processors and digital tools to make editing and revising easier, especially for older students. - Write Across the Curriculum
Integrate writing tasks in all subjects to deepen learning and help students organize and reflect on knowledge. - Read as Writers, Write about Reading
Encourage students to analyze texts from a writer’s perspective and respond to what they read through writing. - Create a Motivating Environment
Foster a classroom culture that values writing, encourages risk-taking, and celebrates students’ efforts and progress.
Strong writing skills are crucial for students’ academic success, future careers, social engagement, civic participation, personal expression, and well-being. Teachers equipped with research-based methods can better help students develop these vital skills.
G/ DR KAREN R HARRIS: Self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) instruction for reading to learn and writing to inform or persuade, grade 1-5
Key Takeaway for Teachers: Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) Instruction
What is SRSD?
SRSD is an evidence-based instructional model designed to teach students in grades 1–5 powerful, explicit strategies for writing and reading to learn. It helps students plan, draft, revise, and self-regulate their writing and reading processes across genres.
Why SRSD?
- Most students worldwide, ages 5–18, struggle with writing without structured support.
- SRSD develops students’ composition skills, genre knowledge, self-regulation abilities, and motivation/self-efficacy as writers and readers.
- It provides scaffolded instruction that shifts responsibility from teacher-led guidance to student independence.
Key Benefits of SRSD (based on over 100 studies across 10+ countries):
- Improves quality and clarity of student writing
- Increases knowledge of writing genres and elements
- Enhances effective use of genre-specific features
- Strengthens student motivation, confidence, and positive attitudes toward writing
- Fosters self-regulation skills in managing the writing and reading process
How is SRSD taught?
- Through discourse-based, interactive, collaborative, and explicit teaching of strategies
- Using scaffolded lessons where teachers model and students gradually take ownership
- Incorporating strategies for close reading and persuasive writing
Impact on Teachers and Professional Development:
- Professional development in SRSD improves teacher effectiveness and student outcomes
- Teachers learn to integrate writing strategies with self-regulation skills to support all learners, including those at risk or with disabilities
Theoretical Foundation:
- SRSD is grounded in a robust theoretical framework integrating multiple learning theories
- Supported by substantial research demonstrating consistent moderate to large effects on writing performance and self-regulation
H/DR ALISON MADELAINE, PRINCIPAL RESEARCH FELLOW, MULTILIT RESEARCH UNIT, FROM SCRIBBLES TO SENTENCES TO STORIES: DESIGNING AN EFFECTIVE EARLY YEARS WRITING PROGRAM
Key Takeaway for Teachers: Effective Writing Instruction
1. Prioritize Writing Instruction:
- Dedicate at least one hour per day specifically for writing to improve student skills.
- Writing should be a clear priority within the curriculum, not an add-on.
2. Teach the Writing Process Explicitly:
- Focus on prewriting activities such as gathering and organizing information.
- Explicitly teach planning, revising, and editing as key stages of writing.
- Help students develop skills for generating and structuring text.
3. Build Foundational Skills:
- Teach vocabulary needed for writing across different text types.
- Support students in mastering sentence structure for clear expression.
- Recognize that some children enter school with limited oral language and writing experience, so scaffold foundational skills such as phonics and letter-sound links.
4. Improve Teacher Knowledge and Capacity:
- Strengthen teachers’ understanding of the writing domain, including transcription (spelling, handwriting) and text generation skills.
- Recognize that teaching writing is complex and challenging; ongoing professional development is essential.
5. Address Challenges:
- Differentiate instruction to cater for diverse abilities and backgrounds within the classroom.
- Manage time constraints effectively while ensuring writing instruction remains consistent.
- Implement assessment strategies to monitor progress and inform teaching.
6. Use Evidence-Based Programs:
- Consider structured programs like the MULTILIT Writing Program (F–2), which uses scripted, whole-class approaches focused on developing composition skills for beginning writers
Summary formula:
Transcription skills (spelling, handwriting) × Text generation skills (planning, organizing, revising) = Writing composition.
I/ DR KAREN RAY: HANDWRITING FLUENCY AND THE IMPACT ON LITERACY
Key Takeaways for Teachers: Handwriting Fluency and Literacy
- Handwriting Fluency Is Foundational to Literacy:
- The ability to write letters fluently and accurately from memory supports early reading and writing skills, including letter recognition, letter-sound correspondence, word reading, spelling, and writing composition.
- Handwriting Is a Complex Skill:
- It involves literacy, fine motor skills, visuomotor coordination, and cognitive processes—all essential for academic success.
- Assessment Tools Are Available:
- The Letter Form Assessment (LFA) is a standardized, quick (5–10 min) tool to assess handwriting fluency in beginning writers (Kindergarten level and above).
- Early Intervention Works:
- The Write Start program, adapted for Kindergarten (Write Start-K), is an effective, evidence-based handwriting intervention delivered in short, twice-weekly sessions (45 min each).
- Children receiving Write Start-K showed greater improvements in handwriting fluency, letter-sound knowledge, word reading fluency, and writing composition compared to standard teaching.
- Handwriting Fluency and Literacy Skills Develop Together:
- Improvements in handwriting fluency positively impact early literacy skills in Kindergarten children.
- Literacy gains were observed regardless of children’s initial literacy ability levels.
- Theoretical Model – The 4Rs:
- Handwriting fluency develops through four cognitive processes: Recall, Retrieve, Reproduce, and Repeat. These processes depend on coordinated perceptual and cognitive skills.
- Practical Implications for Teaching:
- Prioritize handwriting fluency practice alongside phonics and reading instruction.
- Use systematic, explicit handwriting teaching methods like Write Start.
- Monitor handwriting fluency using tools like the LFA to identify and support children with handwriting difficulties early.
- Further Research Needed:
- More replication studies are needed, but current evidence supports integrating handwriting fluency interventions in early literacy programs.
Key Takeaways for Teachers: Developing Literacy Through Oral Language Intervention
- Language Difficulties Are Common at School Entry:
- Many children start school with mild to moderate oral language difficulties, which can affect their learning.
- Oral Language Skills Predict Academic Success:
- Strong oral language abilities are linked to better early academic outcomes and psychosocial development.
- Children with Language Difficulties Often Face Similar Academic Challenges:
- Even mild to moderate language issues can impact literacy and overall school achievement.
- Intervention Focus: Oral Language Development Through Discourse
- Improving oral language skills is critical to supporting literacy development.
- Effective Strategies Include:
- Interactive Storybook Reading: Supports story comprehension and encourages oral language development through discussion and engagement with the text.
- Explicit Teaching of Story Structure: Helps children understand and use narrative elements, improving their oral narrative skills and overall communication.
Leave a Reply