The relationship between executive function and reading...
1/6 2/6

Here is the retraction/correction from @ILAToday of the recent article @plthomasEdD and others co-wrote.
Here are the main take away'
-PLthomas would like you to believe that his writing is science. ILA placed/categorized his writing within the opinion section. ( OUCH!) -Mr. Thomas's writing was not peer-reviewed by the organization and it is labeled as the "opinion of the writers" and the ILA smartly declared that his (Mr. Thomas) all of the three writers' opinions do not reflect the ILA's opinions

2) Lucy Calkins lies again when she states that the "science of reading people" focus more on phonics & have a skill & drill approach to teaching reading & that by contrast w/ BL people SOR proponents don't promote engagement & meaningful reading & writing. @TCRWP-STOP the lies 3) Lucy still does not understand that kids who do not know the code can't engage meaningfully in either writing or reading.

Kudos to the creators of this new podcast.
Don't wait to listen to it.

Everything in this episode is 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
@IDA_Ontario
@thismomloves - Kate Winn-Host
@lifelonglit -Lyn Stone-Guest



Here are my main takeaways:
1 of 22podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rea… #1-We are all travelers on the journey of evidence-based reading instruction.

Many are asking me to support my statements about F and P...Here is a starting thread...
Everyone...please feel free to add more...

https://twitter.com/BenisonMrs/status/1665364143199735812

@DrMPaff, @karenvaites @missypurcell1 ,@EvidentlyR @GaleMorrisonEd @embracethesor -Could you add research articles? I know that you guys are great at having articles at your fingertips.

When it comes to effective reading instruction some place the mantle of “able to compromise” over themselves as that is possible. But in fact, the only thing they are compromising is the chances of many children to access literacy. When it comes to reading instruction practices and programs often squarely fall in one of these categories :

Not everything that's 2 be known about effective literacy instruction is known today.

But we have enough evidence about some instructional practices as being ineffective 4 most kids.
Among the ineffective ones:
3-cueing
Reading Recovery
ALL balanced literacy programs
1of1 More ineffective strategies, activities, and programs:

-sustained silent readers for novice readers
-random phonics lessons
-random phonics scopes and sequences
-word coffins
-color overlays
-skipping over words
-guessing words
-using context clues
-more of the same
2of 2

Imagine living in a world where we said: "Hard things aren't worth our effort" & in response 2 hard things we would put our hands in the air & avoided them & gave up.
Very little worthwhile would be accomplished. This is what Mr. Thomas seems 2 suggest here. @DavidAyer
1 of 8 This tweet by Mr. Thomas reveals a profound misunderstanding of what the scientific devices says about phonics instruction which suggests that phonics is to be taught in an explicit, systematic, sequential, cumulative way with frequent opportunities for practice.
2 of 8

"The Right to Read": A Conversation with Kareem Weaver

@KJWinEducation -inspirational as always
@LexiaLearning
Main takeaways:
# 1
When children struggle to read is a life-altering experience that can have a negative impact on the student future #2
Teachers have been asked to make bricks without straws and then they get blamed for the results.

My teacher's heart can't take someone not understanding exactly what I am saying. So here is my attempt to simplify the language about instructional practices that teachers can use in the classroom right to support new readers

Here are some things you can do today:@DalePearce3 @ndeme_sung -see this thread for simpler language as suggested by you...
1)Explicitly and systematically teach grapheme-phoneme relationships

This means explicitly teaching students the letters and letter combinations and the sounds they spell following a scope and sequence.

Which instructional practices could teachers start implementing in their classroom right now to improve the reading outcomes for novice readers?

Here are some things you can do today: 1) Explicitly and systematically teach grapheme-phoneme relationships

2) Focus on sound accuracy and articulatory gestures.
Many children lack awareness about how speech sounds are articulated.

1/7
I was tutoring a child this week.I prompted the child with a new but decodable word.The child immediately said:I don’t know that word. It is not a “snap word” so I don’t remember it. I reminded the child that good readers use what they to read and to give it a try. 2/7
I also said: All you have to do is to think about the sounds these letters spell. The child then went ahead and read the word.
I said: you did what good readers do. Good readers don’t read my remembering words as a whole.

There really is no real controversy when it comes to what the science of reading proponents say.
In fact, SOR only promotes practices that today's cognitive and reading science has settled.
1/15 The only controversy that exists is that which has been created and promoted by the propaganda machine of those who want to deny the science and thus are unwilling to consider the evidence put in front of them.
2/15