FAQ: Is The Reading Strategies Book 2.0 Aligned to the Science of Reading?

Yes it is. Let’s unpack.

First, what’s the science of reading? A commonly agreed to definition by many researchers is some version of, “A vast interdisciplinary body of research explaining what happens when a reader is reading proficiently, how reading skill develops, and how to teach reading.”

OK, so then what does it mean to be “aligned to” the science of reading? This means that the resource is based on, draws from, and/or agrees with findings from a variety of scientific fields related to reading (i.e. neuroscience, cognitive psychology, education, linguistics, and so on). It’s important to note limitations, however, to bringing published findings into classrooms. For example, many studies are done in controlled settings or with specific populations of students and there is still a need for research about classroom application (Seidenberg, Borkenhagen, and Kerns, 2020). In these cases, aligning resources to “the science” means faithfully interpreting the research, and trying a research-based practice with children in classrooms, noting the impact that practice has on their learning, and sharing only those ideas that work for most. 

In The Reading Strategies Book 2.0  there are over 700 citations* to quantitative and qualitative research from a range of scientific disciplines, published in a range of journals and academic press books. You can download the entire references section to have a look. These citations appear across the book: 

• in the completely rewritten “Getting Started” chapter, where you’ll find 150 citations overall. In this chapter,  I discuss important foundational information such as how the chapter organization of the book (goals) aligns to commonly used research-based frameworks such as The Simple View (Gough and Tumner, 1983), Scarborough’s Rope (Scarborough, 2001), and the Active View of Reading (Duke and Cartwright, 2021), how and when to use strategies in the classroom, what other elements are essential to include in a comprehensive research-based literacy program, and more. I also provide an overview of the research basis for strategy instruction spanning decades (e.g., Alexander, Graham, & Harris, 1998; Chiu, 1998; Dignath & Büttner, 2008; Georgiou & Das, 2018; Haller, Child, & Walberg, 1988; Hattie, Biggs, & Purdie, 1996; Ho & Lau, 2018; Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995; Weinstein, Husman, & Dierking, 2000; Berkeley, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 2010; Donker et al., 2014; Okkinga et al., 2018; Shanahan et al., 2010; Duke & Cartwright, 2021; Zimmerman, 1986, 2002; McBreen & Savage, 2021; Steacy et al., 2016; Wright & Cervetti, 2017; Samuelstuen & Bråten, 2005; Stevens, Walker, & Vaughn, 2017).
  

• in the thirteen subsequent chapters, each of which focuses on one goal (i.e., engagement and motivation, reading with accuracy, fluency, understanding main idea, understanding vocabulary and figurative language, and so on). In these chapters you’ll find completely rewritten opening pages with a research summary related to the goal, a review of related skills, and advice for assessment.

• across the 300+ individual pages with strategy lesson ideas. On each of these pages there is a “Research Link” that summarizes studies that form a research basis for or connect to the core idea of the strategy. 

Notably, the chapter on reading with accuracy, with strategies for supporting students with decoding, blending, tracking, and monitoring, was reviewed by prominent researchers who study word reading–Dr. Linnea Ehri and Dr. Maryanne Wolf–as well as a speech language pathologist (Angie Neal) and dyslexia expert (Sandra Maddox) to ensure its alignment to science.

In addition to studies cited across the book, each chapter in the new edition is organized according to skill progressions to support systematic sequential instruction to deepen skill levels within each goal, which is a research-based approach. Also, each strategy offers language teachers can use to break down skills into step-by-step how tos, which helps make teaching explicit, and invisible processes visible to learners. Explicit instruction is a research-based practice (See: Archer and Hughes, 2011; Hollingsworth & Ybarra, 2009; Rosenshine, 2012). 

Is the Reading Strategies Book 2.0 all you need for a literacy block that is aligned to the science of reading? No. It is a flexible supplemental resource that you can use in a variety of ways—to offer differentiated instruction in one-on-one or small group settings, to pre-teach or re-teach concepts from your curriculum, to create curriculum, to infuse explicit literacy instruction into content area studies, and more. To be clear, it is not a phonics curriculum, though there are ideas to help children transfer what they learn in phonics to connected text reading. It references recently-published inclusive demonstration texts, but does not include them. It does not have a knowledge-building scope and sequence for science and social studies, but can be used to help children build knowledge within these subjects. It is meant to be a trusted companion for you to use flexibly, responsively, and systematically, every/any day and across the day. 

Finally, while this book is based on tons of research, parts have been reviewed by researchers, and the ideas have been shown to work in many classrooms by the practitioners who have piloted the work, remember that the action research you do every day as a teacher–trying an approach, noticing the impact it has on your students, refining your teaching as necessary, and trying again–is essential. Even an idea “aligned to science” isn’t promised to work with every child in every setting. We must expect that different students could respond to the same teaching in different ways, so we must be ready with different approaches, language, texts, and strategies to meet each unique learner where they are. I hope that the collection of research-based strategies and suggestions in The Reading Strategies Book 2.0 gives you a toolbox you can use easily in your classroom, no matter the grade or subject you teach, or your approach to literacy instruction.

*A special thank you to Dr. Gabriel DellaVecchia, my research assistant on this project, for helping me find, vet, and summarize hundreds and hundreds of pages of studies, book chapters, and papers, as well as for offering essential feedback on my writing throughout the process. Working collaboratively with you for a year taught me so much about research, evaluating the quality of studies, and so much more.

References:

Alexander, P. A., Graham, S., & Harris, K. (1998). A per- spective on strategy research: Progress and prospects. Educational Psychology Review, 10(2), 129–154.

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

Berkeley, S., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2010). Reading comprehension instruction for students with learning disabilities, 1995–2006: A meta-analysis.Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 423–436.

Chiu, C. W. T. (1998). Synthesizing metacognitive interventions: What training characteristics can improve reading performance? [Paper presentation]. American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, United States.

Dignath, C., & Büttner, G. (2008). Components of fostering self-regulated learning among students. A meta-analysis on intervention studies at primary and secondary school level. Metacognition and Learning, 3(3), 231–264.

Donker, A. S., De Boer, H., Kostons, D., Van Ewijk, C. D., & van der Werf, M. P. (2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta- analysis. Educational Research Review, 11, 1–26.

Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25–S44.

Georgiou, G. K., & Das, J. P. (2018). Direct and indirect effects of executive function on reading comprehension in young adults. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(2), 243–258.

Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10.

Haller, E. P., Child, D. A., & Walberg, H. J. (1988). Can compre- hension be taught? A quantitative synthesis of “metacog- nitive” studies. Educational Researcher, 17(9), 5–8.

Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 99–136.

Ho, E. S. C., & Lau, K. L. (2018). Reading engagement and reading literacy performance: Effective policy and practices at home and in school. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(4), 657–679.

Hollingsworth & Ybarra (2009). Explicit direct instruction: The power of the well-taught, well-crafted lesson. Corwin Press.

McBreen, M., & Savage, R. (2021). The impact of motiva- tional reading instruction on the reading achievement and motivation of students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 33(3), 1125–1163.

Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J., & Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215–1239.

Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively reading. Erlbaum.

Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of Instruction: Research-Based Strategies That All Teachers Should Know. American Educator, 36(1), p12-39. 

Samuelstuen, M. S., & Bråten, I. (2005). Decoding, knowl- edge, and strategies in comprehension of expository text. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46(2), 107–117.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). Guilford.

Seidenberg, MS,  Borkenhagen, M, & Kearns DM (2020). Lost in translation? Challenges in connecting reading science and educational practice. Reading Research Quarterly.

Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Schatschneider, C., & Torgesen, J. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through
3rd grade: IES practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from the NCEE website: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide/14

Steacy, L. M., Elleman, A. M., Lovett, M. W., & Compton, D. L. (2016). Exploring differential effects across two decoding treatments on item-level transfer in chil- dren with significant word reading difficulties: A new approach for testing intervention elements. Scientific Studies of Reading, 20(4), 283–295.

Stevens, E. A., Walker, M. A., & Vaughn, S. (2017). The effects of reading fluency interventions on the reading fluency and reading comprehension performance of ele- mentary students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the research from 2001 to 2014. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(5), 576–590.

Weinstein, C., Husman, J., & Dierking, D. (2000). Self- regulation interventions with a focus on learning strate- gies. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 727–747). Academic Press.

Wright, T. S., & Cervetti, G. N. (2017). A systematic review of the research on vocabulary instruction that impacts text comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(2), 203–226.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 307–313.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.