WEBVTT
00:00:00.000 -->
00:00:02.879Welcome to EdView360.
00:00:05.519 -->
00:00:15.359So we need more of those leadership development opportunities that are run by people with real expertise.
00:00:17.039 -->
00:00:29.600And then I think when people understand what needs to be done, if they have the temperament to stick their neck out and assert themselves, they will succeed.
00:00:29.760 -->
00:00:41.039Of course, they have to have a lot of personal characteristics of encouraging people and bringing them along, getting buy-in and all those things that have always been the characteristics of effective leaders.
00:00:41.359 -->
00:00:47.520I know that right now what we need is fearless leadership who's willing to lead through transjustice and paradigms.
00:00:47.759 -->
00:00:50.399For too long, it's been a specific reading disability.
00:00:50.479 -->
00:00:51.119It isn't.
00:00:51.280 -->
00:00:53.520It's one in written language.
00:00:54.079 -->
00:00:55.600That means reading and writing.
00:00:55.759 -->
00:00:57.840I've been using some basic examples.
00:00:58.000 -->
00:01:01.039I don't know a child who can spell constitution, but can't read it.
00:01:01.200 -->
00:01:08.959And I don't know a child who can write an essay about a grade level understanding of constitution who can't read and understand a grade level essay on it.
00:01:09.120 -->
00:01:10.799Those two things are parallel.
00:01:10.959 -->
00:01:12.319They're based on language.
00:01:12.480 -->
00:01:16.560And for too long, we've siloed those and we haven't put those together.
00:01:17.760 -->
00:01:20.640You just heard from renowned literacy experts Dr.
00:01:20.799 -->
00:01:22.239Louisa Moates and Dr.
00:01:22.319 -->
00:01:23.359Tim Udegaard.
00:01:23.680 -->
00:01:24.000Dr.
00:01:24.239 -->
00:01:25.040Motz and Dr.
00:01:25.120 -->
00:01:30.159Udegaard are our podcast guests today on Edview360.
00:01:33.200 -->
00:01:45.040Welcome to Voyager Silpress Learning's Edview360, the podcast where we bring together leading voices in literacy education to explore what works, what matters, and what's next.
00:01:45.280 -->
00:01:47.359I'm your host, Cassandra Montovani.
00:01:47.680 -->
00:01:52.319On our show today, we are honored to have two of the most respected figures in the field, Dr.
00:01:52.400 -->
00:01:53.840Luisa Moats and Dr.
00:01:53.920 -->
00:01:55.040Tim Odegaard.
00:01:55.439 -->
00:02:06.400This episode, Rocket Science Revisited, Where Should Reading Research Take Us Next, takes a candid look at the urgent need for systemic change in how reading is taught and supported across the U.S.
00:02:06.719 -->
00:02:07.680We'll revisit Dr.
00:02:07.760 -->
00:02:11.520Moats' seminal work, Teaching Reading is Rocket Science, and hear Dr.
00:02:11.599 -->
00:02:17.520Odegaard's perspective on dyslexia, teacher preparation, and the moral imperative to serve all learners.
00:02:17.759 -->
00:02:25.120Together, they'll challenge assumptions, clarify misconceptions, and call for courageous leadership at every level of education.
00:02:25.360 -->
00:02:26.560Let's dive in.
00:02:26.879 -->
00:02:31.360So, first, to start things off, I'd love to hear from each of you on a personal level.
00:02:31.520 -->
00:02:31.840Dr.
00:02:31.919 -->
00:02:40.800Odegaard, can you share the personal turning points that made literacy and especially serving learners with dyslexia such a deeply personal mission for you?
00:02:41.120 -->
00:02:42.479Yeah, thanks for having me.
00:02:42.719 -->
00:02:45.120The turning point really was early in life.
00:02:45.280 -->
00:02:49.520Learning to read and write, and then reading and writing were always extremely challenging for me.
00:02:49.680 -->
00:02:59.199Given how prolific I've been with writing now and how much I have to read, most people would probably find that a little incredulous for me to say.
00:02:59.360 -->
00:03:14.240But I was identified very early as having real struggles with the basic mechanic of reading the English language or language, which is reading, and then the basic mechanic or one of the basic mechanics of writing the English language, which is spelling.
00:03:14.400 -->
00:03:20.000And we know that those are defining characteristics across all writing systems of what we call dyslexia.
00:03:20.240 -->
00:03:35.280Now, for me, it really set a spark that I wanted to prove to myself my worth, because part of my history is that I was perceived to be very less than when it comes to intellectual capability of learning more, which again, I've become a brain scientist.
00:03:35.360 -->
00:03:49.520So it's a little ironic that the child who in early elementary was thought as being the class Dunts grew up to be a well-published and well-funded neuroscientist and helped to develop actual brain imaging protocols used on brain scanners.
00:03:50.000 -->
00:04:02.400So it's a little ironic in hindsight, which makes my story very compelling because you have to realize that test given so long ago was not a characterizing, it wasn't an accurate characterization of my true potential.
00:04:02.639 -->
00:04:05.280Now, I didn't start off in literacy.
00:04:05.439 -->
00:04:10.159What I did was I started off as being a developmental cognitive psychologist and I was trained in that area.
00:04:10.240 -->
00:04:19.040And I looked at learning and memory, potentially how you'd apply that to forensic settings as well as basic learning mechanisms across the lifespan, early childhood and older childhood.
00:04:19.120 -->
00:04:26.079And it was when I started to draft my postdoctoral fellowship grant proposal for NICHD that was funded.
00:04:26.240 -->
00:04:30.319I shifted and I put research into and cross-training and dyslexia and literacy.
00:04:30.399 -->
00:04:36.399So I shifted coming out of my doctoral work into my postdoctoral funded research from NIH to look at that.
00:04:36.560 -->
00:04:38.079And that was the turning point for me.
00:04:38.399 -->
00:04:38.720Wow.
00:04:38.879 -->
00:04:48.560Well, I just want to say congratulations to you for not allowing those early sort of stigmas to shape your passion for your work.
00:04:48.720 -->
00:04:55.199And to go a little off script, if you don't mind, I'd like to just ask a follow-up question to you on what you shared because it is so personal.
00:04:55.519 -->
00:05:08.639If you were going back and you could talk to your younger self, just entering your dyslexia research, what question would you tell younger you to chase more boldly or to stop avoiding?
00:05:08.959 -->
00:05:10.480Oh, the younger me.
00:05:10.959 -->
00:05:23.040That's an interesting question because the younger me was very much in the basic mechanics and the neurobiological mechanisms and also the basic underpendings of how we group letter chunks.
00:05:23.120 -->
00:05:30.560And I was using very basic perceptual processing tasks developed by Ann Treesman, a world-renowned researcher on attention.
00:05:31.120 -->
00:05:33.759She was positioned towards the end of her life at Princeton.
00:05:33.920 -->
00:05:36.639She was the wife and partner of Danny Kahneman.
00:05:36.720 -->
00:05:38.399So Danny won the Nobel Prize.
00:05:38.560 -->
00:05:41.279Anne won my heart with her research and methodology.
00:05:41.519 -->
00:05:47.519I was really interested in the orthographic patterning and what Anne's question was what is a feature?
00:05:47.759 -->
00:05:59.839And my hypothesis, which I think has been borne out more and more, all those years ago, back when I was writing up my dissertation and looking at this in a memory perspective, I was thinking this it's going to be scalable.
00:06:00.000 -->
00:06:07.680So that early in development, I bet the orthographic chunks and features might be the smallest units of writing, such as graphemes or even letters.
00:06:07.920 -->
00:06:12.879But then as we start to develop and get more advanced, I bet we start to get to larger chunks.
00:06:12.959 -->
00:06:30.560So that if I had divided this line of research that was going to use really quick perceptual processing in both proficient adults as well as children with and without learning differences to see the scalable differences to where now we're at final stable syllables such as T-I-O-N or S-I-O-N.
00:06:30.720 -->
00:06:32.639We're at these different chunks to do it.
00:06:32.720 -->
00:06:36.720And I would be able to use 100 millisecond precision to look into those.
00:06:36.800 -->
00:06:38.800I think that was well ahead of the curve.
00:06:39.120 -->
00:06:46.959But then I would tell myself that only matters if it makes it into classrooms, which I think is where my passion really led me.
00:06:47.040 -->
00:06:53.439So it would be to also be brave and realize that a crooked path might lead to something very important.
00:06:53.600 -->
00:06:56.959And so don't be afraid to leave academia, come back to academia.
00:06:57.040 -->
00:06:59.279Don't be afraid to do more translational research.
00:06:59.439 -->
00:07:05.680And don't be discouraged if people tell you that the questions you're asking aren't necessarily meritorious from a scientific standpoint.
00:07:05.920 -->
00:07:13.519Because sometimes the most obvious questions to you are the ones that seem like they're the least important for anybody else.
00:07:13.680 -->
00:07:18.399And so that's been really a defining feature of what I've tried to have the courage to do.
00:07:18.720 -->
00:07:19.360Absolutely.
00:07:19.519 -->
00:07:20.959Well, thank you so much for sharing.
00:07:21.040 -->
00:07:22.160And I know it's very personal.
00:07:22.240 -->
00:07:24.879And so I appreciate you sharing so candidly with us.
00:07:25.120 -->
00:07:25.519And Dr.
00:07:25.680 -->
00:07:28.079Moats, I want to turn the question a little bit to you.
00:07:28.399 -->
00:07:31.519You have been such a pillar of this industry.
00:07:31.600 -->
00:07:36.480And so you have seen the ups and downs and twists and turns and the crooked road, as Dr.
00:07:36.560 -->
00:07:38.000Odegaard mentioned.
00:07:38.160 -->
00:07:42.000So, what really keeps you so deeply involved in this work?
00:07:42.639 -->
00:07:47.920Okay, well, first of all, it's a privilege to be having a dialogue with Tim and with you.
00:07:48.160 -->
00:07:51.519Thank you for encouraging us to do this.
00:07:51.839 -->
00:07:54.240So I am not dyslexic.
00:07:54.560 -->
00:07:56.480I learned to read easily.
00:07:56.720 -->
00:08:06.399And in my first job, I was hired as the secretary in the neuropsychology laboratory at the New England Medical Center out of Wellesley College.
00:08:06.560 -->
00:08:11.360I was a little bit underemployed, but my boss thought I had more potential.
00:08:11.519 -->
00:08:17.680So he said, Well, you can be a technician in neuropsychology if you also type all the reports.
00:08:17.839 -->
00:08:19.519So I agreed to do that.
00:08:19.759 -->
00:08:28.800And my boss put a white coat on me and I started giving an extensive battery of neuropsychological tests to all these people who came to the clinic.
00:08:29.040 -->
00:08:32.960And this was before neuroimaging existed.
00:08:33.279 -->
00:08:52.000So when we had patients with neurological disease or injury or suspected pathology of any kind, we would use these tests to try to make inferences about where that problem lay in the brain and which brain systems might be involved.
00:08:52.320 -->
00:09:01.919So that if there was an actual treatment possible for the person, that the neurosurgeon or the neurologist would get some guidance.
00:09:02.080 -->
00:09:04.559It was a very primitive science at the time.
00:09:04.879 -->
00:09:11.360But what interested me the most was the kids who were sent to the clinic because they couldn't read or write.
00:09:11.679 -->
00:09:20.399And the school districts in good faith would send them to us hoping we would provide them with some insight into what was the matter.
00:09:20.639 -->
00:09:37.039And I remember my boss, who was the licensed neuropsychologist of note, would put a report about three lines long saying we couldn't find anything the matter with this child's brain.
00:09:37.759 -->
00:09:40.559So it was not our problem, kind of.
00:10:20.960 -->
00:10:34.000So fast forward when I had an aborted career in music songwriting, went back to the neuropsychology clinic and became the educational specialist.
00:10:34.720 -->
00:10:37.039I was told I needed a doctorate.
00:10:37.279 -->
00:10:43.679So I enrolled at Harvard in the graduate program in reading and language.
00:10:44.159 -->
00:10:50.240And that's when my big aha's occurred because I began to study language.
00:10:50.559 -->
00:11:01.919And all of a sudden, I gained all these insights that I've been writing about ever since about the fact that reading is dependent on language.
00:11:02.080 -->
00:11:03.279Reading is language.
00:11:04.240 -->
00:11:18.080So then fast forward a long time through I had a number of different jobs and research and clinical work and policy, this and that and the other thing.
00:11:18.480 -->
00:11:37.840And I became really passionate about the fact that there were a gazillion teachers, like the teacher I was, who had not had the requisite training and background that would allow them to do meaningful, effective work with their students.
00:11:38.080 -->
00:11:43.279And that was when in 2000 I published my speech to print book.
00:11:43.600 -->
00:11:45.840I began writing a lot more.
00:11:45.919 -->
00:11:51.759Well, actually, I'd been writing for a decade about all this, but I didn't have a wide audience.
00:11:52.000 -->
00:12:00.639But when I really suck my neck out and said, look, we've got to develop courses for teachers, that's when letters became a reality.
00:12:00.879 -->
00:12:18.240And that's been my primary focus is still trying to campaign for teacher education, educator education, because we can write policies and pass laws and mandate this and that and have standards and whatever.
00:12:18.399 -->
00:12:38.000If the teacher doesn't understand what they're doing, who they should do it for, how they should do it, and whether or not it's being effective according to their intentions, uh, we're not going to make the gains with the promise of the science that we have.
00:12:38.399 -->
00:12:38.879Absolutely.
00:12:38.960 -->
00:12:49.919And we're going to actually talk a little bit about some of the laws, but before we do that, I wanted to go back to to talk about speech to print because it has shaped how thousands of educators understand language.
00:12:50.000 -->
00:12:59.279But when you first published it, was there an idea you worried might be too disruptive, but then turned out to be an essential component of later work?
00:12:59.600 -->
00:13:02.399Oh, I was worried that no one would pay any attention to it.
00:13:02.960 -->
00:13:19.600And that I would never have any influence beyond a very small group of educators that I encountered through the International Dyslexia Association, mainly where I was a board member and an officer for a long time.
00:13:19.759 -->
00:13:28.799And I would meet absolutely stellar individuals who knew a whole lot and who were very effective.
00:13:28.960 -->
00:13:33.840But I was aware that they were like 1% of the teacher population.
00:13:34.000 -->
00:13:37.039So I thought I was writing for a very small audience.
00:13:37.360 -->
00:13:48.320In letters, what letters became, I had absolutely no clue that we would find the audience that we have found with that.
00:13:48.559 -->
00:13:49.600And boy, have you.
00:13:49.679 -->
00:13:54.720I mean, it's been adopted at a scale that few professional learning models have ever reached.
00:13:54.879 -->
00:14:02.240So I'm so glad that she didn't let the concern of a small audience stop you from pursuing that work because you have made such a difference.
00:14:02.480 -->
00:14:06.720So I want to circle back to some of the reading laws that have come across the country.
00:14:06.879 -->
00:14:13.519So we've seen a wave of dyslexia and science of reading laws come out across the country, but their impact varies widely.
00:14:13.840 -->
00:14:24.639So I'm going to ask the both of you to share your thoughts on what these laws reveal about the progress we're making nationally and what you both feel that the gaps are that remain in research and implementation.
00:14:24.799 -->
00:14:25.360So Dr.
00:14:25.440 -->
00:14:29.120Odegaard, I'm going to start with you, if you don't mind answering that one for me, please.
00:14:29.440 -->
00:14:32.240Oh, it's an interesting way of phrasing the question.
00:14:32.720 -->
00:14:37.039So what do these laws say about the progress that we've made?
00:14:37.279 -->
00:14:46.960Well, I think it kind of echoes back to Luisa's point, which is there is a small, devoted group of people who know quite a bit and are very passionate and want to.
00:14:47.120 -->
00:15:05.600And I think what we're seeing is that there's still a very small group that has grown across the states, across the context of North of the United States, and also up to Canada and North, so all of North America, who are very devoted to finding levers that they think they can pull to make that change happen in the classroom.
00:15:05.840 -->
00:15:24.960So what we're, I think what we're seeing is that there's a very select group of people who are highly motivated, are coming to these conferences like the International Associate Association, the Reading League, and other more grassroots types of groups like decoding dyslexia, who are energized and out there and they're pulling what they think is a lever that makes sense.
00:15:25.120 -->
00:15:30.159And they'll go as far as to say that there could be no change without a legislative context in place.
00:15:30.559 -->
00:15:42.320What the research is showing is saying that the impact these are having has been very negligible, unfortunately, when you actually do research like I've done to actually ask and use objective data to say what has been the impact.
00:15:42.559 -->
00:15:53.279A review done by Elizabeth Zagata and Michael Coyne says that sadly, when it comes to this type of research, impact studies like I've done are very scarce.
00:15:53.440 -->
00:15:58.960And so what we've learned and what we need more from research is exactly what Michael and Elizabeth called for.
00:15:59.200 -->
00:16:06.399More research that can concretely tell us and provide guidance on what we're learning and what we're seeing.
00:16:06.559 -->
00:16:11.360And what we're seeing is limited application and translation into classrooms.
00:16:11.519 -->
00:16:20.320So that means that we'll have limited ability to make the actual objective change that we want, which is the lives of children and literacy for children in the nation.
00:16:20.960 -->
00:16:21.200Dr.
00:16:21.360 -->
00:16:23.039Mose, same questions to you.
00:16:23.360 -->
00:16:40.399Well, yeah, if I could say that it is Tim Odegaard's research that has reinforced for me some realities that I've observed informally, but that have great importance for the way we proceed.
00:16:40.720 -->
00:17:00.799First of all, kids who are less well off economically are far less likely to be identified as having reading problems that need to be treated with extra support or intervention, let alone a diagnosis of dyslexia.
00:17:01.440 -->
00:17:21.920And the more a school is afflicted with school-wide low performance, the less likely it is that the problems of individuals are going to be addressed with the what we call research-based instruction.
00:17:22.480 -->
00:17:35.119And furthermore, as we know from multiple studies, that the kids in those populations of less economic advantage tend to be kids of color.
00:17:35.680 -->
00:17:47.440And so we have these laws on the books now, which seem like a step forward, and they are a step forward in building awareness.
00:17:48.000 -->
00:18:14.240But in many states, those laws came about because of the advocacy of I hate to say it, but it's true, white privileged parents who expected more of their schools and who had the means, the time, they and the strategic approach to affect statewide legislation with their advocacy.
00:18:14.960 -->
00:18:27.039But what has happened is we still see just huge disparities in the extent to which schools are embracing the real science and not just giving lip service to it.
00:18:27.279 -->
00:18:29.920So there are those realities there.
00:18:30.160 -->
00:18:40.640And then if I could talk a little more about just in terms of instruction, what I think the messages of research are, just to be brief about this.
00:18:40.799 -->
00:18:48.160We could go on for a long time, but just to be brief about this, there are two major aspects of reading instruction.
00:18:48.319 -->
00:18:52.079I'm not even talking about spelling and writing yet.
00:18:52.480 -->
00:19:03.200But those are you have to teach the kids how to read the words, that's word recognition, and they have to comprehend the language in the text, academic language.
00:19:03.359 -->
00:19:13.119That means their vocabulary, their ability to process the syntax, their background knowledge, their knowledge of what to expect when they read a certain kind of a text, and all those things.
00:19:13.279 -->
00:19:15.119That's in the comprehension bucket.
00:19:16.079 -->
00:19:24.960Our science is telling us about good practices that are very far from being widely embraced.
00:19:25.200 -->
00:19:47.279And instead, what we have is, I think, on the word recognition side, an earnest but naive attempt to teach kids word reading using a kind of piecemeal approach, like, okay, I'm going to do some phonics, and I'm going to do some morphology, and I'm going to do some phoneme awareness with a separate manual.
00:19:47.440 -->
00:19:48.880And those things don't add up.
00:19:49.279 -->
00:19:59.279The research tells us that this lesson needs to be integrated with those components in a meaningful sequence, feeding off of one another.
00:20:00.000 -->
00:20:07.599Furthermore, that word recognition work needs to be integrated with the actual reading that kids do.
00:20:07.839 -->
00:20:09.279So there's transfer.
00:20:09.519 -->
00:20:17.680And very often what we're seeing is real compartmentalization of these components that are now enshrined in our laws.
00:20:18.240 -->
00:20:24.160Again, an earnest attempt in the right direction because it's better than what was going on before.
00:20:24.400 -->
00:20:32.079But in order to translate effectively, we have to get across the idea of integrated, language-focused instruction.
00:20:32.240 -->
00:20:59.119And then on the comprehension side, let's see, a short way of saying this is we're not in our classrooms doing nearly enough with in-depth, reflective reading of challenging material that requires the student to become comfortable with book language and academic language, which is not the same as conversational language.
00:20:59.279 -->
00:21:09.759And we're doing a lot of superficial instruction in the name of comprehension, which is not going to boost our national profile at this point.
00:21:10.240 -->
00:21:21.519Well, it's interesting that you bring that up because it was something I wanted us to dive into as a group, which is that the development of oral language and comprehension are frequently overlooked in screening and in curriculum adoption.
00:21:21.680 -->
00:21:29.200So you've already touched a little bit about what some of the consequences of this neglect are, but how can some of these systems correct that?
00:21:29.359 -->
00:21:32.240I'd like for you both to share your thoughts on this, if you would.
00:21:32.640 -->
00:21:44.799I'm going to pass that one to Tim because you, in that in the issue of Annals of Dyslexia, has some profiles of states that seem to be ahead of the game.
00:21:44.960 -->
00:21:51.359So what are they doing to bring practice into line with research?
00:21:51.759 -->
00:21:58.799Yeah, the two profiles were done by two different groups, one working in Kansas, the other one working in the context of Ohio.
00:21:58.960 -->
00:22:04.160Actually, the lead authors were not necessarily in Ohio, but were working with the state of Ohio.
00:22:04.640 -->
00:22:14.160What they're really good examples of is putting systemic level things at place that would provide structural resources that would be able to help make alignment.
00:22:14.319 -->
00:22:30.000So one of the things that really popped out at me as I was reading my colleagues' work as they were reporting on these was I do think that a coordinated effort to make sure that the intent and the good faith intent by these advocates is followed through.
00:22:30.240 -->
00:22:43.200Because what Luisa was describing of this poorly constructed, naive approach to this, creates the ability for research scientists to say that the applicants don't know the science because that's not what the science would support.
00:22:43.359 -->
00:22:52.000And so that creates one group that should be in support of this type of initiative because it should be them seeing the translation of their science, but we're not seeing it.
00:22:52.160 -->
00:23:00.160And then the second group would be the people who were naysayers all along saying, and when we don't get the results, we told you it would be this all over again.
00:23:00.319 -->
00:23:31.680And so the consequences of us not having systemic and structural pieces that can integrate and coordinate with higher education, to look at syllabus, go in and look at content, create alignment to the intentions, to have a pipeline of pre-service educators coming out with better knowledge of the linguistic components and the language components that they're wanting kids to be able to understand orally and be able to understand in the written form and be able to express themselves in both oral and written form.
00:23:31.920 -->
00:23:36.880You want them to be able to do those things and some practical awareness about what good practice looks like.
00:23:37.039 -->
00:24:02.000So they're actually instantiating that in the practical components, working to make sure that there's now in-service support so that the teachers who are in the field who may have been let down in the context of their higher higher education, and or as shifts in policy are resulting in large-scale adoption of new approaches in their context to let them have a fighting chance to have the resources they need to understand that.
00:24:02.240 -->
00:24:12.480And then also thinking about the interface of how the leadership will go in, the challenges that I will say is that those are examples of kind of intermediate level support.
00:24:12.640 -->
00:24:19.680The legislation pushing down to the Department of Education at the state level, creating intermediaries at the local context.
00:24:19.839 -->
00:24:21.680It all happens at the local context.
00:24:21.759 -->
00:24:25.359So if your schedule doesn't allow for the time for something to happen, it can't happen.
00:24:25.599 -->
00:24:38.720If your screening isn't aligned in a way, one of the other groups of researchers, actually, two different groups of researchers, screened educators, understanding and use of the screeners that have been launched in response to the dyslexia and the literacy legislation.
00:24:38.880 -->
00:24:50.400They're ill-informed, they don't feel prepared, they don't know how to use the data, they find that the technology is often missing and in place for the way that these are being administered, and they find that there's not the time they need to administer it.
00:24:50.559 -->
00:24:56.160And so then they devalue it or they don't even know how to value the data that they're being handed in this mandate.
00:24:56.319 -->
00:25:01.680And so I think that Kansas and Ohio highlight how the intermediates can come in.
00:25:01.839 -->
00:25:13.200But again, the one level down that I know from working with folks in those states historically into today is that the follow-through and the accountability word isn't the right one.
00:25:13.359 -->
00:25:18.799The support and the realization of that into the local context will be the driver of change.
00:25:19.119 -->
00:25:19.359Dr.
00:25:19.519 -->
00:25:21.759Motz, did you have some thoughts as well that you want to understand?
00:25:22.559 -->
00:25:33.519Yeah, as I think about what I would want to see 10 years down the road, I've been around a long time and have seen a lot of things come and go.
00:25:34.400 -->
00:25:41.200And now everybody's spending a lot of energy talking about AI and this and that, the latest thing.
00:25:41.920 -->
00:25:56.880What I want us to do is remember some very fundamental things and not have these very fundamental things get lost in the maelstrom of fads, fights, whatever goes on in education.
00:25:57.200 -->
00:26:06.240Number one, there is no substitute for the teacher when it comes to language learning in the classroom.
00:26:07.200 -->
00:26:10.799Kids do not learn language from screens.
00:26:12.000 -->
00:26:14.160They don't learn language from each other.
00:26:14.799 -->
00:26:28.160They don't learn it from TV, they learn from interaction with better models and who can also encourage their language development.
00:26:28.480 -->
00:26:32.240There's no substitute for reading aloud to kids.
00:26:32.400 -->
00:26:34.720That's not gonna go away.
00:26:35.039 -->
00:26:42.000And if any parent is listening to this, an iPad is not a substitute for a lap and a book.
00:26:42.720 -->
00:26:46.240Really important, and let's not sacrifice that.
00:26:46.480 -->
00:26:52.880And then in the classroom, we find now some growing advocacy for this.
00:26:53.279 -->
00:26:58.400Kids need to be reading real books, the whole book, not a little excerpt.
00:26:58.799 -->
00:27:08.160And they need a teacher who has been shown how and supported in deep reading of the book.
00:27:08.319 -->
00:27:10.559So the book has to be worth deep reading.
00:27:10.720 -->
00:27:12.960Yes, it can't be superficial.
00:27:13.200 -->
00:27:17.440It has to have layers of meaning to uncover and talk about.
00:27:17.839 -->
00:27:31.119And we need to get back to having a classroom be a place where people talk about meaningful things and the book that and the shared experience of reading the book is the focus.
00:27:31.200 -->
00:27:38.160And the teacher is capable of managing that or guiding that experience.
00:27:38.319 -->
00:27:41.440That's the heart of reading instruction.
00:27:41.759 -->
00:27:48.079So as we look ahead, I just I want to take some of the fluffy stuff out.
00:27:48.160 -->
00:27:52.400I would I and then people say, well, where do we get the time to do this?
00:27:52.720 -->
00:28:01.599Well, you you make the time for the most important things and don't waste time with the ancillary stuff.
00:28:01.920 -->
00:28:08.720Like, oh gee, if you're teaching kids how to spell, they don't need to write every letter in a different color.
00:28:09.039 -->
00:28:10.400That is not efficient.
00:28:11.279 -->
00:28:12.480It's popular.
00:28:13.279 -->
00:28:14.240I could go on.
00:28:14.319 -->
00:28:15.119I'm not.
00:28:15.519 -->
00:28:21.839No, I'm so glad you touched on the topic of AI because we see it everywhere we turn these days.
00:28:21.920 -->
00:28:28.799And I know it does provide bandwidth in certain capacities and can become a really great tool.
00:28:29.039 -->
00:28:45.039But as we talk about the topic of dyslexia and we talk about students who are in need of intervention, firmly believing that there is a place for print and an actual textbook in hand and how the research shows that's so much more impactful, especially for that student population.
00:28:45.200 -->
00:28:45.759So, Dr.
00:28:45.839 -->
00:28:57.039Odegaard, would you mind weighing a little bit on your take on sort of the AI's place within the classroom and how to balance that AI and print within the challenges that the classroom faces today?
00:28:57.440 -->
00:28:58.240Well, I appreciate that.
00:28:58.400 -->
00:29:01.680I've been working with my colleague Megan Gierka and a set of advisors.
00:29:01.759 -->
00:29:12.880We've actually written a brief for the International Social Association thinking through this, and the premise being what Louisa started with technology can't be a replacement for human interaction because it is language.
00:29:13.039 -->
00:29:15.839And so that interaction is going to be key to it.
00:29:16.160 -->
00:29:21.200Really, what it forced us to do is to start from the premise of, well, how does good learning happen?
00:29:21.279 -->
00:29:22.960And what would good instruction look like?
00:29:23.119 -->
00:29:27.839And where would the interface be to where, in a time-strapped position, where would it be?
00:29:28.000 -->
00:29:38.559And most importantly, what I started to get a better appraisal with as I was looking at it is we have so little time for kids to do the thing that you want them to do and the ultimate end of everything.
00:29:38.720 -->
00:29:47.359So if it comes with work with first and second graders, really working with reading words and reading them in context and putting it into practice and having those.
00:29:47.599 -->
00:30:04.480So it really kind of boiled down to thinking through would this be best to use in the way that Carol Connor and her research looked at with using machine learning and algorithms to use formative data that might be captured to let the teachers know where children's strength and weaknesses are.
00:30:04.640 -->
00:30:11.920And what Carol's research really showed was when she put teachers up against her algorithm, her algorithm was better at doing what computers do good.
00:30:12.079 -->
00:30:14.960Look at good big data sets and find patterns.
00:30:15.119 -->
00:30:17.359They're really good at it when they're trained well.
00:30:17.599 -->
00:30:31.920And so Carol was showing early, I mean, a long time ago, with her A to I platform, some of the promise of using technology to augment and give data and to think about what the time a child might benefit the most in a program might be.
00:30:32.160 -->
00:30:52.319Also, would there be a way of using AI to generate ways for teachers to think about their instructional approaches and to create probes, prompts, and types of items that would fit in to make it really good, then review those with deep knowledge to look to see if those were generated in a way that would be beneficial?
00:30:52.480 -->
00:30:58.720So creating the content that would be beneficial to differentiate and intensify instruction for kids.
00:30:58.799 -->
00:31:03.359So then to be a teacher's assistant in that way to build out time.
00:31:03.599 -->
00:31:11.920There is also going to be the need for our diverse learners who take so much more time and practice to answer a really simple question.
00:31:12.079 -->
00:31:23.759Are we at the time now, since so many schools do put so much money into computers that are into computer programs that we're going to think about what those are doing?
00:31:24.000 -->
00:31:26.480Very rarely are they actually having them read words.
00:31:26.640 -->
00:31:28.480Very rarely are they having them spell words.
00:31:28.559 -->
00:31:32.480They're normally proxies for those things with mouse clicks on a screen.
00:31:32.799 -->
00:31:39.519That learning from some industry data that I've been proxy to behind the scenes isn't as good as a spelling task.
00:31:39.680 -->
00:31:41.920So again, that comes back to my basic principle.
00:31:42.079 -->
00:31:46.559If you want kids to get better at doing the thing, have them do the thing.
00:31:48.720 -->
00:31:54.000Voyager Sopras Learning is the reading, writing, and math intervention specialist.
00:31:54.160 -->
00:32:03.279With four decades of results, we provide evidence-based interventions and assessments that help educators ensure academic success for all students.
00:32:03.519 -->
00:32:06.480Learn more at VoyagerSopris.com.
00:32:40.880 -->
00:32:47.440I mean, I know that Mark Seidenberg's name is thrown around a lot, and he's known for a few things as far as the research side of it.
00:32:47.599 -->
00:32:49.440And he creates these computational models.
00:32:49.599 -->
00:32:55.279From a computational standpoint, they're actually pretty simplistic because they're based on these layers of representations.
00:32:55.440 -->
00:33:00.720So they're not the most complicated of neural models that we have in this space from a science standpoint.
00:33:00.880 -->
00:33:09.680But the thing that he never identifies for you is those models learn from feedback, just as children learn from feedback.
00:33:09.920 -->
00:33:25.599So when a child is able to be in a situation where they're able to stumble along for themselves and self-teach them as autodidacts because they're proficient enough to be able to do that, they'll actually pick up a book and with a little bit of instruction, they can kind of take off.
00:33:25.680 -->
00:33:27.599I know that Mark likes to say things like this.
00:33:27.759 -->
00:33:35.920But for the a lot of us and a non-trivial amount of us, it's going to take a lot more because spell check doesn't work for me for a reason.
00:33:36.000 -->
00:33:39.599I spell words that are completely different words that I can't recognize and read.
00:33:39.759 -->
00:33:56.720So to the extent to where I can't self-correct myself, as David Sherr would talk about in this self-teaching hypothesis, it means that certain learners won't benefit as much and they can't give themselves that corrective feedback and fix up that they need in the moment when it comes to word recognition practice.
00:33:56.880 -->
00:34:01.359So to the extent that we might be able to leverage in those settings, that would be really good.
00:34:01.519 -->
00:34:21.440The AI is also probably going to find real traction in the screening and the identification, as researchers like Laura Stacey and Don Compton continue something that I know that Luisa and I have thought a lot about, which is which items and orthographic patterns and what types of situations would give you the most diagnostic and how much you customize screeners to pull those apart.
00:34:21.599 -->
00:34:38.960So as we move into a new generation of adaptive testing and computer adaptive testing that's going to be fed linguistic data and will use large data sets, being the global we, because researchers are being funded right now to do a developmental lexicon project based off of Babe Belova's work at WashiU.
00:34:39.119 -->
00:34:43.119And I think that's really promising as we think about AI and its benefits.
00:34:43.280 -->
00:34:44.639It can see the patterns.
00:34:44.800 -->
00:34:48.079And when we know how to structure it, there's a lot of risks.
00:34:48.239 -->
00:34:50.559So I we're also really hesitant to say it.
00:34:50.639 -->
00:34:52.159And a computer is not a teacher.
00:34:52.239 -->
00:35:11.440But where it can fit into good practice with good models of instruction, that I think that's key is we need to think about how we take really good instruction and we create the opportunity for AI to facilitate educators to do that and then give students the facility to do better practice to create that information that they need in their heads language.
00:35:11.760 -->
00:35:12.000Yeah.
00:35:12.159 -->
00:35:12.559Love that.
00:35:12.639 -->
00:35:12.880Dr.
00:35:13.039 -->
00:35:17.039Motz, any other thoughts you want to share regarding your take on AI?
00:35:17.440 -->
00:35:20.320I am such a non-techie person.
00:35:20.880 -->
00:35:26.159Um I've never used it for anything that I know about consciously.
00:35:26.320 -->
00:35:31.199I mean, I know it is using me in multiple ways all the time.
00:35:32.559 -->
00:35:40.639And I know I will be dragged into the modern age where AI is perhaps a useful tool.
00:35:40.960 -->
00:35:47.599But I really it's interesting that all that's going on, the fervor and the discussion of AI.
00:35:47.679 -->
00:36:08.800And Tim, I I can't argue with Tim about the potential for AI to be used to help teachers be more skilled and perhaps give them more immediate feedback about the the dialogue that's going on between them and the students.
00:36:08.880 -->
00:36:33.440For example, if we want that dialogue to be getting at more substance and less superficiality, perhaps there can be a little bug in the teacher's ear driven by a computer that's listening to this interaction, and say, why don't you ask how come the students know that the character is this way or that way?
00:36:33.840 -->
00:36:45.599And because trying to teach teachers how to do that without a whole lot of training and feedback is has proven to be difficult.
00:36:45.679 -->
00:36:51.280So if there's a way to do it kind of in the moment, that might be promising.
00:36:51.519 -->
00:37:07.679And then the focus could still be on the worthwhile text where shared reading is a pleasure and sets kids up to be lifelong readers.
00:37:07.840 -->
00:37:23.760So that's the other thing we're seeing as a society is that while we grapple with how to teach kids to read, to learn to read, more and more we are all concerned about the fact that people don't read as they get older.
00:37:23.840 -->
00:37:36.000And even in college, we've had studies from institutes of higher education saying that college students come in not ever having read a book or not being able to handle a reading list.
00:37:36.320 -->
00:37:55.119That was a white paper from the whatever it is on higher education just a couple of years ago, that professors have noticed a huge difference in their students from even 10 years ago because of the amount of screen time, number one, and also the way reading is taught in our schools.
00:37:55.440 -->
00:37:56.079Absolutely.
00:37:56.320 -->
00:37:56.639Wow.
00:37:56.800 -->
00:37:57.280Wow.
00:37:57.519 -->
00:38:02.239Well, I'm going to shift gears a little bit and transition to talk a little bit about data.
00:38:02.559 -->
00:38:08.639So data transparency is often talked about, but rarely implemented well.
00:38:08.960 -->
00:38:19.599So, how do you feel that transparent data at both the classroom and state levels can be leveraged to hold systems accountable for the literacy outcomes that we hope for?
00:38:20.159 -->
00:38:22.639Well, I'll say something fairly general.
00:38:22.719 -->
00:38:28.960And I know Tim, this is really Tim is much more of a researcher and statistician than I am at this point.
00:38:29.119 -->
00:38:42.639But while he's thinking, one large goal that I think we need in education is to align what we teach with what we test.
00:38:43.119 -->
00:38:50.800Because right now we're testing kids a lot on stuff that they haven't necessarily been taught.
00:38:51.199 -->
00:38:53.519And there's this misalignment.
00:38:53.599 -->
00:38:57.760And I don't think this happens in European countries, for example.
00:38:57.920 -->
00:39:13.119I think in European countries there's a curriculum that outlines content that teachers should be teaching instead of these general goals that we have in our standards about kids finding the main idea.
00:39:13.280 -->
00:39:23.440Well, finding the main idea is very different if you're reading about the American Revolution or if you're reading about migrating habits of birds.
00:39:23.679 -->
00:39:32.800And what we do is we put these tests together that have short passages about any topic under the sun, and the kids may or may not know.
00:39:32.880 -->
00:39:38.079And then we know that their background knowledge affects their performance on the test.
00:39:38.159 -->
00:39:46.559But when you're done, you get a generic picture of a kid's ability to perform on that test relative to other kids who took the test.
00:39:46.880 -->
00:39:59.360But we don't have a good alignment between let's call it a triangle, what teachers are taught to do the content that they're supposed to be teaching.
00:40:00.000 -->
00:40:12.639And the tests that we give to kids to evaluate whether or not they've learned these important things in social studies, science, literature, and then math, the arts, you name it.
00:40:13.440 -->
00:40:14.639So that's my thinking.
00:40:14.719 -->
00:40:23.360That I I don't, it's like this big readjustment needs to happen in the whole system to have that alignment occur.
00:40:23.679 -->
00:40:24.159Absolutely.
00:40:24.320 -->
00:40:24.559Dr.
00:40:24.639 -->
00:40:26.320Odegaarden, your thoughts?
00:40:26.800 -->
00:40:28.239Well, I think that's a good setup.
00:40:28.320 -->
00:40:29.760And I didn't quite know what I was going to go.
00:40:30.079 -->
00:40:36.559Because the spirit of the question really is that there's a lot of movement in legislative houses for accountability for education.
00:40:36.800 -->
00:40:40.000Different states are passing these and implementing these dashboards.
00:40:40.079 -->
00:40:52.400I know that I'm here in Tennessee, and our group score was just holding a webinar on using the new Tennessee dashboard so that parents and others can see into the classrooms and into the schools to see kind of performance data.
00:40:52.480 -->
00:41:02.239I know that Florida has been in aligned and got a screener that was going to hold accountability even earlier in the process, starting in kindergarten and first with their state adopted screener.
00:41:02.480 -->
00:41:10.880So I understand the spirit of it, but I think what Louisa is highlighting is really critical to think about what we measure and then what the ultimate outcome is.
00:41:11.039 -->
00:41:16.639And it highlights what we know about research and also where some of our blind spots are.
00:41:16.800 -->
00:41:20.880And also when we when we think get too concrete where we miss the opportunity.
00:41:21.039 -->
00:41:23.119And I know that oral language came up earlier.
00:41:23.199 -->
00:41:43.280And so one of the challenges has been that when I work with high-level folks in large districts, some in Florida, some in other places, or states, some in the south, some in the east, some in the west, they're identifying that the diagnostics of their screeners aren't capturing the kids who are going to go on and not do as well as they need to on those high-stakes tests that Luis is talking about.
00:41:43.440 -->
00:41:54.159And so one of the working hypotheses are is based off of our LARC study that the US federal government funded at the very high dollar amount, which was longitudinally following language and comprehension development.
00:41:54.320 -->
00:42:01.440And one of the interesting things is that in the early grades, your word abilities are going to be the best predictor of your reading comprehension.
00:42:01.599 -->
00:42:02.880And so they account for everything.
00:42:03.199 -->
00:42:07.119Of course, we're going to statistically or we're going to follow where the data tell us to go.
00:42:07.280 -->
00:42:13.119So the best diagnostics from a screening standpoint and from a measurement standpoint is to be measuring can they read the words.
00:42:13.280 -->
00:42:14.079Now, why is that?
00:42:14.239 -->
00:42:19.760Well, it's because in the early grades, late kindergarten, first grade, they're really simple text.
00:42:20.000 -->
00:42:23.199The word structure, the text structure is so simple.
00:42:23.360 -->
00:42:25.519The background knowledge doesn't really need it.
00:42:25.599 -->
00:42:37.280You're going to be able to read it, understand it, and you probably have a little bit of background knowledge because it's going to be kind of a passage about Tim and his dog walking to the woods, going on an adventure, things that kids are likely going to know about.
00:42:37.440 -->
00:42:44.960There might be some cultural differences that we need to take into account, but often those are kind of washed out of that as far as like making sure that they're okay.
00:42:45.199 -->
00:42:52.400What we're missing is that, and what they say is that, well, they're doing just fine on those screeners, a lot of kids, and they get to that third-grade test.
00:42:52.559 -->
00:42:54.400Now we have retention laws and they don't do well a lot.
00:42:54.719 -->
00:42:55.280What happened?
00:42:55.519 -->
00:43:13.199Well, what we find from, let's say, Tiffany Hogan's research, Susan Adloff's research with Tiffany and others is that all of a sudden, measures that were in kindergarten weren't predictive of reading comprehension early, are now more predictive than the word reading ability later on, let's say in late second, third grade.
00:43:13.360 -->
00:43:14.480And why is this now?
00:43:14.639 -->
00:43:17.760Well, the text structure has gotten so much more dense.
00:43:18.000 -->
00:43:20.559The words in it are much bigger and more complex.
00:43:20.719 -->
00:43:25.519And simply reading the words and maybe knowing what a story is about isn't going to be sufficient anymore.
00:43:25.760 -->
00:43:33.760Those earlier abilities in oral language and those comprehension strands of oral language now mean a lot.
00:43:33.920 -->
00:43:37.840And so the predictive value is developmentally shifted.
00:43:38.000 -->
00:43:40.639And so it raises this interesting question.
00:43:40.880 -->
00:43:56.400We shouldn't necessarily be reading measuring oral language to find your classic dyslexic better in those grades, but we probably should do a better job to make sure that we are teaching to the full spectrum of language development and giving them the skills to set them up for success later on.
00:43:56.639 -->
00:43:58.559Now, Louisa made a good point.
00:43:58.880 -->
00:44:09.119It might be that we're not teaching the text structure in a disciplinary way early enough to really make them understand how they should attack different texts and the approach they should use with different ones.
00:44:09.280 -->
00:44:10.559That's what she's highlighting.
00:44:10.800 -->
00:44:13.440Now, that might matter and that might account for some stuff.
00:44:13.519 -->
00:44:42.000But I will say that my hunt tells me as I talk to certain states, why they're motivated to maybe bring in a language screen earlier is because they're hopeful that by identifying kids whose language needs to be elevated so that their comprehension skills are being elevated and not relying on written language as a gatekeeper to tell you that they will be able to better find kids who will not do all that high-stakes test, might be able to develop simple decoding abilities, but later on start to struggle.
00:44:42.159 -->
00:44:48.159Historically, Hollis, Scarborough, and Don Compton and even Hugh Katz have called this at a late emerging type.
00:44:48.320 -->
00:44:53.920Me and Tiffany Hogan joke because it's like, well, if you would have looked for them a little earlier, you might have found them.
00:44:54.079 -->
00:45:03.039So I'm hopeful that I know that I'm motivating and trying to get into some different types of research questions to say, I'm not arguing that the research wasn't right.
00:45:03.119 -->
00:45:13.679I'm arguing, were we not measuring the right things early to see the benefit of instructing certain things and bringing it online so it'll continue to develop and we can elevate it in certain classes of kids.
00:45:13.840 -->
00:45:16.559It's a good hypothesis, which needs to be tested.
00:45:16.960 -->
00:45:18.079That's really important.
00:45:18.239 -->
00:45:33.920I just want to second what Tim said that the measurement of language in preschool kids or before kindergarten is a powerful predictor of who's going to be able to comprehend what they read after third grade.
00:45:34.159 -->
00:45:38.960That's that, and that is a finding that's been replicated a number of times.
00:45:39.199 -->
00:45:50.719But because it's even more clear that's the case with better measurements, it also points us in the direction, once again, and this is not new news.
00:45:50.800 -->
00:46:10.719It's just that we've got to get people to pay attention to the importance of finding kids early and giving them instruction, I could use that word, in an early childhood to develop, design to develop their language abilities.
00:46:10.880 -->
00:46:37.519And that we see from studies we were hearing about from the language conference at Big Sky this summer, those interventions make a significant difference, especially with kids who come from more impoverished backgrounds, with who are not exposed to the language models or not read to as much and all that.
00:46:37.760 -->
00:46:47.119The way we level the playing field is not to wait until third grade to retain them because they haven't met the standard.
00:46:47.360 -->
00:46:55.440The way to level a playing field is to get those kids as early as we can in their development.
00:46:56.000 -->
00:46:56.719Absolutely.
00:46:56.960 -->
00:46:57.360Absolutely.
00:46:57.440 -->
00:47:01.119That's such an important point that I hope our listeners really grab a hold of.
00:47:01.280 -->
00:47:06.320And now you both have been just such courageous leaders in your own rights.
00:47:06.480 -->
00:47:13.519But I want you to both to weigh in on what does courageous leadership look like in literacy reform today?
00:47:13.679 -->
00:47:18.880And how can leaders be supported to make difficult evidence-based decisions?
00:47:19.519 -->
00:47:20.880Loaded question.
00:47:21.760 -->
00:47:29.599Well, for one thing, we need some leadership academies where leadership, we can't just kind of wait for it to happen.
00:47:30.239 -->
00:47:39.679We can't hope that those rare individuals who transform school districts because their leadership will become more numerous.
00:47:39.840 -->
00:47:42.400I think we have to be more deliberate about it.
00:47:42.639 -->
00:47:52.960We have to have institutes for superintendents and principals and the people, the decision-making level in the school system hierarchy.
00:47:53.360 -->
00:48:01.280And universities can be more involved in this as well by housing institutes like that.
00:48:01.519 -->
00:48:09.440But first of all, they need a grounding in what we mean by the science of reading, so that their confusion about the term.
00:48:09.760 -->
00:48:22.000Reed Lion has a little paper going around right now about having to clarify in his work, clarify the difference between the science of reading and structured literacy.
00:48:22.639 -->
00:48:24.800Yeah, structured language and literacy.
00:48:24.960 -->
00:48:36.960Whereas one is a vast body of work that resides in journals and textbooks, and the other is a set of principles for instruction.
00:48:37.039 -->
00:48:38.880And they are not the same thing.
00:48:39.199 -->
00:48:48.239But unless people have an opportunity, the potential leaders have an opportunity to learn exactly what's what and what does it look like.
00:48:48.880 -->
00:48:51.760And what do we want to have happen?
00:48:51.840 -->
00:48:54.000And what does the science really say?
00:48:54.719 -->
00:49:01.199And get them away from the superficial discussions that happen in social media.
00:49:01.360 -->
00:49:02.239That's deadly.
00:49:02.960 -->
00:49:12.800So we need more of those leadership development opportunities that are run by people with real expertise.
00:49:14.480 -->
00:49:26.960And then I think when people understand what needs to be done, if they have the temperament to stick their neck out and assert themselves, they will succeed.
00:49:27.119 -->
00:49:38.480Of course, they have to have a lot of personal characteristics of encouraging people and bringing them along, getting buy-in and all those things that have always been the characteristics of effective leaders.
00:49:38.960 -->
00:49:48.880I think leadership looks different depending upon who's doing the leading, as far as are you an organization out front leading driven by a leadership team, if you're a person.
00:49:49.280 -->
00:49:51.199And I want to go back to something.
00:49:51.360 -->
00:49:56.639So Reed and I've done a second commentary that we just released and really clarifying what structured literacy is.
00:49:56.800 -->
00:50:04.159And of course, what I did was I pulled together documents that I helped to craft from the International Sex Association, as well as a fact sheet on structured literacy.
00:50:04.239 -->
00:50:06.880And Louisa wrote that back in 2020.
00:50:07.039 -->
00:50:09.119And what did Louisa say within the first paragraph?
00:50:09.360 -->
00:50:12.719Structured literacy is not the same as science, is not the science of reading.
00:50:12.880 -->
00:50:19.599So I think that good leadership makes sure that what you're doing is putting forth accurate information.
00:50:19.920 -->
00:50:27.760If you want to be out there front leading and communicating, you need to do your own homework for yourself.
00:50:28.000 -->
00:50:37.280And so as Louisa always holds anybody and me in particular accountable for, is it sounds like the first step, Tim, is for you to go and read the research or go and do your homework first.
00:50:37.440 -->
00:50:39.840Thankfully, I know quite a bit about structured literacy.
00:50:39.920 -->
00:50:40.960So I was good there.
00:50:41.039 -->
00:50:44.960But I it wasn't without going back and reading Louisa's fact sheet.
00:50:45.199 -->
00:50:49.840It wasn't without going back and reading what was on the International Sex Association's website.
00:50:50.000 -->
00:50:57.039And it wasn't without going back and reading Louise Spears Swirling's white paper that I helped to contribute to, along with Stephanie Alitabe and others.
00:50:57.199 -->
00:51:00.880I went and I first grounded myself in what came first.
00:51:01.039 -->
00:51:06.400And so that I knew that I could speak from a point of clarity on my own behalf.
00:51:06.559 -->
00:51:09.280And I don't know how often we have that.
00:51:09.519 -->
00:51:21.679So organizational leadership, let's say from the International Sex Association, if you want to be a science-led group, means that as science updates your knowledge, you need to make sure that you are consistent.
00:51:21.760 -->
00:51:25.280And when people come to your site, you find consistent information.
00:51:25.440 -->
00:51:29.760And when I went to the site for structured literacy, for example, I found consistent information.
00:51:30.000 -->
00:51:33.039Now you need to make sure that you're modifying and updating.
00:51:33.119 -->
00:51:34.719This isn't a static field.
00:51:34.880 -->
00:51:37.280Structured literacy will adapt and change.
00:51:37.440 -->
00:51:42.719I know that there's efforts right now to actually bring more oral language and make it even clearer and more transparent.
00:51:42.880 -->
00:51:46.960I think that it's a time to talk about the International Sexy Association standards.
00:51:47.039 -->
00:51:49.280I want to make sure that those are up to date.
00:51:49.679 -->
00:52:01.519We should be leading organizationally with these pieces like a definition, like standards, to make sure that we are honestly translating to best practice.
00:52:01.920 -->
00:52:08.719Other way of leading well is to do what you will always hear Louisa do, which you'll hear someone like Reed do, like myself do.
00:52:08.800 -->
00:52:18.639I've already modeled it, which is am I stating a truth that we know or a hypothesis that I think is worth us testing in laboratories of schools under tight conditions and doing it?
00:52:18.800 -->
00:52:26.239I'm not sure how much added value is going to come if we start doing more language screening in pre-K and K, for example.
00:52:26.480 -->
00:52:27.760I think it's worth testing.
00:52:27.840 -->
00:52:30.639And I think it's worth us looking at what will happen.
00:52:30.800 -->
00:52:34.079I think it's worth us going to the literature and making good estimates.
00:52:34.320 -->
00:52:40.880But I know that right now what we need is fearless leadership who's willing to lead through transgestions and paradigms.
00:52:41.119 -->
00:52:43.679For too long, it's been a specific reading disability.
00:52:43.840 -->
00:52:44.480It isn't.
00:52:44.719 -->
00:52:46.960It's one in written language.
00:52:47.360 -->
00:52:48.960That means reading and writing.
00:52:49.119 -->
00:52:51.199I've been using some basic examples.
00:52:51.360 -->
00:52:54.400I don't know a child who can spell constitution but can't read it.
00:52:54.559 -->
00:53:02.320And I don't know a child who can write an essay about a grade level understanding of constitution who can't read and understand a grade level essay on it.
00:53:02.480 -->
00:53:04.079Those two things are parallel.
00:53:04.239 -->
00:53:05.679They're based on language.
00:53:05.840 -->
00:53:09.360And for too long, we've siloed those and we haven't put those together.
00:53:09.519 -->
00:53:12.400So Young Suck Kim has a beautiful treatise on this.
00:53:12.480 -->
00:53:16.000It'll come out from Guilford, where she's talking about and translating that research.
00:53:16.079 -->
00:53:20.079I know there's other scholars who are making more teacher-focused and accessible ones.
00:53:20.239 -->
00:53:24.559Young's is accessible but higher level, and others are writing it.
00:53:24.719 -->
00:53:26.000That connection will be key.
00:53:26.079 -->
00:53:28.400So that's one paradigm shift that we're in right now.
00:53:28.559 -->
00:53:38.880And the fact that I had to argue about keeping spelling and the definition of dyslexia is just silly to me at this point because I don't know a child who can spell a word but can't read it.
00:53:39.039 -->
00:53:45.840I'm going to have a study that's going to come off of this where I actually look at data from 7,000 kids, showing that those are not profiles that we see very often.
00:53:46.079 -->
00:54:04.559And I also think that the other paradigm shift is to have an honest conversation about oral language and the fact that we should be screening, as Louisa said a lot earlier and tracking those and the experiment of real-world settings and doing more observational naturalistic studies on that as we move to certain types of assess ways of thinking about it.
00:54:04.639 -->
00:54:06.639So I think those are two big paradigm shifts.
00:54:06.880 -->
00:54:14.480The fact that we're going to ground this in language, and one shift that has to happen is to talk about written language, and that's what literacy is.
00:54:14.719 -->
00:54:20.320And then the second paradigm shift is to honor the roots of written language as being primarily in language.
00:54:20.639 -->
00:54:21.199Wonderful.
00:54:21.519 -->
00:54:32.320And I want to kind of close the loop on a conversation starter that we had at the beginning of the talk today, where you both shared your personal sort of driver in the mission of this work.
00:54:32.400 -->
00:54:32.800And Dr.
00:54:32.880 -->
00:54:35.199Motes, you as an early educator, Dr.
00:54:35.280 -->
00:54:37.920Odegaard is your experience as a student with dyslexia.
00:54:38.079 -->
00:54:52.800So both of you sitting kind of back in those seats, if today's early career educators could truly understand just one thing about dyslexia and reading development, what should it be and why that thing?
00:54:53.039 -->
00:54:53.840So Dr.
00:54:54.000 -->
00:54:56.800Motz, I'll ask you to answer first, and then Dr.
00:54:56.880 -->
00:54:58.400Odegaard, if you wouldn't mind.
00:54:58.800 -->
00:55:06.800If they could understand one thing, the start point, just to understand that the word dyslexia means difficulty with language.
00:55:07.920 -->
00:55:44.159Still, I as much as has been written about this, it is not uncommon still to see kids with dyslexia diagnosed or not diagnosed, be referred to optometrists for eye movement training, or seeing learning specialists afflict hundreds of flashcards on kids as if visual imaging and memorization of words is what it's all about.
00:55:44.400 -->
00:55:46.000I mean, I still see this.
00:55:46.239 -->
00:56:01.679And the idea that vocabulary has to be taught as a representation of language and all that that means sound, spelling, and meaning and context all influencing how that written language works.
00:56:02.000 -->
00:56:13.280If I could get that across as a starter, I find that actually arriving at that point uh involves a lot of hours of professional development.
00:56:13.360 -->
00:56:25.840And then if somebody really gets it, then they're set off and running to be a really well-qualified, effective practitioner because they'll continue to educate themselves.
00:56:26.639 -->
00:56:27.119Thank you.
00:56:27.519 -->
00:56:27.760Dr.
00:56:27.840 -->
00:56:28.639Odegaard?
00:56:29.199 -->
00:56:30.719Well, I would say it's persist.
00:56:31.199 -->
00:56:38.800That's a key change in terminology, this in the 2025 revision of the idea definition of dyslexia, and it replaces so much baggage.
00:56:39.039 -->
00:56:42.079But of course, if you want to be a good educator, you persist.
00:56:42.239 -->
00:56:45.119You persist for those kids who struggle.
00:56:45.360 -->
00:56:58.559And it's through that persistent nature of their struggles and the crucible of good instruction that we find the kids who are the ones who really should get the label of dyslexia if we want to have this label be maintained.
00:56:58.880 -->
00:57:01.440Because there's so much good that can happen.
00:57:01.599 -->
00:57:07.440We early identify and we remediate the ones who are so much easier to remediate.
00:57:07.599 -->
00:57:13.280We're left with the ones who are smaller in number and really have these persistent challenges.
00:57:13.440 -->
00:57:20.079And it is language, and dyslexia is primarily characterized at the word level, the lexical level of language.
00:57:20.239 -->
00:57:24.239And we know that the co-occurrence of broader language problems is real.
00:57:24.400 -->
00:57:37.760And when we borrow the Dorothy Bishop and Maggie Snowing approach to developmental language disability and dyslexia is being these separable, independent constructs that can overlap, it lets us know that language is key to both of them.
00:57:37.840 -->
00:57:45.679And with dyslexia, it's the printed form at the lexical level with reading and spelling, and that it's the persistent nature of those that's key.
00:57:46.159 -->
00:57:55.119And it isn't necessarily that a cognitive test is going to be the crucible that will elucidate who is the real dyslexic versus not.
00:57:55.280 -->
00:58:02.639And I say that with a person, if you ask me my early life as a researcher, the first study I did on dyslexia was a brain imaging study.
00:58:02.800 -->
00:58:12.800And I wanted to know if there was a neurobiological underpinning to the ones who were the most resistant and persistent in how they responded to even the best of intervention.
00:58:12.880 -->
00:58:15.920And there were subtle differences and they are distinguishing.
00:58:16.079 -->
00:58:20.079So when you look at my dyslexia research, you will find a common theme.
00:58:20.239 -->
00:58:24.159When I'm actually working with kids, I'm asking a fundamental question.
00:58:24.480 -->
00:58:30.000What instructional approaches are going to help us identify the ones who are most persistent?
00:58:30.079 -->
00:58:34.079And how might we now make changes to remediate even their needs?
00:58:34.239 -->
00:58:36.159And how do we address them differently?
00:58:36.400 -->
00:58:40.800It's one that Stephanie Altava's asked for most of her career, along with Doug Fuchs and others.
00:58:40.880 -->
00:58:47.280I know Don Compton has been key in this, but the challenge we have, and for those teachers, is you're part of the solution.
00:58:47.440 -->
00:59:07.039Because if we don't have good instruction for all the kids, and we teach the ones who truly can learn with moderate to ease how to do that, where will we ever find, as Louisa said, my research highlights, the logical in game that 65% of the kids in the school context have dyslexia?
00:59:08.239 -->
00:59:08.719They don't.
00:59:09.360 -->
00:59:12.320And they don't have to be 65% of the kids struggling.
00:59:12.480 -->
00:59:28.159And so when we can find the kids who truly are persistently poor responders to instruction and in moderate levels of intervention, you start to use the instruction to discriminate and to pull out and to identify those who are really struggling.
00:59:28.239 -->
00:59:29.039And that's key.
00:59:29.119 -->
00:59:30.480It takes good systems.
00:59:30.719 -->
00:59:38.159Until everyone can read, we can never address the needs of the one to five percent who will be the most persistently difficult to teach to read in spell words.
00:59:38.639 -->
00:59:39.599Thank you for that.
00:59:39.920 -->
00:59:45.440Well, we are nearing our time, but you both have such amazing insights to share.
00:59:45.599 -->
00:59:52.000Is there anything that we haven't had a chance to talk about that you really want to leave our listeners with today?
00:59:52.719 -->
00:59:53.039Dr.
00:59:53.199 -->
00:59:54.480Moats, start with you.
00:59:55.119 -->
00:59:59.280Well, when there are people like Tim Odegaard working on these problems.
01:00:01.599 -->
01:00:09.360As you can see, extremely knowledgeable, persistent, mission-driven and brilliant.
01:00:10.000 -->
01:00:10.960Gives me hope.
01:00:12.159 -->
01:00:13.039Absolutely.
01:00:13.360 -->
01:00:14.239Talk to it again.
01:00:14.719 -->
01:00:28.159When we have people like Louisa who have written seminal texts that are based off of really good information, which most of has not shifted in response to the research that we've done, I think that we stand on a solid foundation of knowledge to build off.
01:00:28.239 -->
01:00:31.119It just so happens we call that the science of reading.
01:00:31.360 -->
01:00:34.960And one translation of that happens to be called structured literacy.
01:00:35.199 -->
01:00:42.719And the science of reading is probably a term that needs to paradigm shift too, because honestly, that body of reading is a research is about reading and writing.
01:00:42.960 -->
01:00:47.760We just haven't really talked as much about the writing strand of the parts of it.
01:00:47.920 -->
01:00:56.559But I think that's what I'd like to say is just my gratitude for Louisa for showing us the way and to highlighting the rock that we have to stand on.
01:00:56.880 -->
01:00:58.159Thank you both so much.
01:00:58.400 -->
01:01:01.840This has been a fantastic, insightful discussion.
01:01:02.000 -->
01:01:07.039And we are so lucky to have both of you fighting the good fight for our students and our educators.
01:01:07.119 -->
01:01:08.000So thank you both.
01:01:08.400 -->
01:01:09.760Today's conversation with Dr.
01:01:09.920 -->
01:01:20.079Louisa Motz and Tim Odegaard reminds us that teaching reading is not just about methods, it's about justice, equity, and preparing every child for success.
01:01:20.320 -->
01:01:28.159The science of reading has given us the tools, but it's up to the leaders, institutions, and communities to act with courage and consistency.
01:01:28.559 -->
01:01:38.800If you're an educator, policymaker, or advocate, we hope this episode inspires you to push for evidence-aligned instruction, transparent outcomes, and systemic reform.
01:01:39.039 -->
01:01:43.280Literacy is a civil right, and the time to act is now.
01:01:43.920 -->
01:01:46.719Thank you for joining us on Edview 360.
01:01:46.880 -->
01:01:53.360Please be sure to subscribe, share this episode, and continue the conversation about what it truly means to teach reading well.
01:01:53.599 -->
01:01:58.880Until next time, keep learning, keep leading, and keep moving literacy forward.
01:02:00.079 -->
01:02:03.360This has been an Edview 360 podcast.
01:02:03.519 -->
01:02:14.719For additional thought-provoking discussions, sign up for our blog, webinar, and podcast series at VoyagerSopris.com/slash Edview360.
01:02:14.960 -->
01:02:23.199If you enjoyed the show, we'd love a five star review wherever you listen to podcasts and to help other people like you find our show.
01:02:23.519 -->
01:02:24.480Thank you.
