Just how much does it help to teach children to use strategies when they read--strategies like creating a graphic organizer of the passage, or summarizing as they read, or asking themselves questions and answering them? I’ve just published an article in Educational Leadership summarizing the research on this question, and I’ll summarize it here. In 2006, I argued that there was lots of evidence that comprehension strategy instruction worked, and in fact, yielded a big boost to comprehension. I was in good company—The National Reading Panel had drawn the same conclusion five years earl ..read more

Some colleges are no longer requiring that applicants submit SAT scores (or they’re making them optional) because scores correlate with parental income and with ethnicity. Thus the test appears biased—good students are being denied a place at school because of their ethnicity or class. Paige Harden wrote an excellent piece for the Atlantic arguing that dropping the SAT in the name of equity in admissions is a bad idea. I encourage you to read it, but to provide a little background here, Harden argues that the SAT is not biased, but America’s K-12 education system is. The SAT faithfully tracks ..read more

​ ..read more

Earlier this week I participated in a Zoom session organized and hosted by David Weston of the Teacher Development Trust. David asked me an interesting question, one I hadn’t considered before. He noted that learning styles theories have become a shibboleth for educators who are scientifically “in the know;” mention learning styles in any positive way and they will pounce on you with glee. There are two problems with verbally thrashing people who say something you think lacks scientific support. First, it’s simply a bad tactic. You look like a bully and  snob; sure, the flush of self-rig ..read more

There’s a new report out about the teaching of reading. It came to my attention when Diane Ravitch tweeted about it, with the tag “There is no Science of Reading.” It turns out to be a relatively brief policy statement from the National Education Policy Center, signed by the Education Deans for Justice and Equity. I think the statement is pretty confused, as it conflates issues that ought to be considered separately. This statement is meant to be about the science of reading, so much of the confusion arises from a failure to understand or appreciate the nature of science, how basic science ap ..read more

Over the weekend the New York Times published an article on the front page about the teaching of reading. A friend posted in on Facebook saying "I won't know what to think about this until Dan comments on it." I thought some background for people like my friend might be useful. How is the teaching of reading still controversial? Surely they’ve sorted it out by now. The relationship between a teacher’s actions and a child’s success is murky. Psychologists love to point out that “complex behavior is multiply determined.” Reading is complex, therefore many factors contribute to success or fai ..read more

There was a mild kerfuffle on Twitter about some comments made by literacy researcher Dick Allington; he made some not-very-academic remarks about people with whom he disagrees (see here). Much of Alligton's work is serious, but this didn't strike me as serious, so I merely made a joke about it on Twitter, but a few people replied in earnest, among them this one Allington is quoted in the article as saying he's "reasonably sure" dyslexia doesn't exist. It's a valuable question: what's the basis for considering dyslexia different than just "bad at reading?" Presumably, we’re going to me ..read more

A recent tweet caught my attention. It was posted by Sherry Sanden, a professor at Illinois State, in response to a thread from APM reporter Emily Hanford, well known to educators for her reporting in the last 18 months on the best way to teach reading and the state of reading instruction in the US. Hanford was responding (I think) to an abstract of a talk Sanden and colleague Deborah MacPhee were to present at ILA, which Hanford thought was inaccurate and possibly a response to her reporting. Hanford posted a series of 14 tweets supporting various aspects of her claims about reading, many wit ..read more

The Journal of Learning Sciences has posted a Call For Papers for a special issue, “Learning In and For Collective Social Action.” It’s overtly political, and it takes a particular political stance: the first paragraph mentions furthering “progressive social movements.” I think this special issue broadcasts the wrong message about the Journal, and will foster misunderstanding about the relationship of science and politics. Let me start with the relationship between basic and applied sciences. Basic science aims to be value-free. It seeks to describe the world as it is. I am not claiming that ..read more