Originally posted on my X account here.
Can we talk about the literacy change process? As much as I would love for our kids to receive direct, explicit, systematic instruction, the truth is, most districts don’t know what that means in terms of PD, approach, etc. Teachers aren’t equipped.
The implementation strategy needs to be so concrete that it doesn’t blink if there’s turnover, even of a key figure. Regardless, there’s a progression. You can't just throw a new curriculum at unprepared teachers and expect readers.
If you don’t already know, it’s time to find out exactly what your staff truly knows about the research. Did they attend a university that taught cueing or did they attend a university that knows the science?
Take a look at your literacy team. If they’re wearing an “I Love Lucy” badge on their resume with TC PD and OSU on their resume, maybe it’s time to look for someone coming out of MSJ, BPU or UCA (all IDA accredited, btw).
Some states are making a big mistake by forcing schools to choose a SOR curriculum by this fall. They won’t have time to PD these teachers correctly because you and I both know their data is going to show they won’t know what to do with the curriculum because true SOR is an approach that requires the ability to be diagnostic and prescriptive, the ability to assess and analyze, and the willingness to pursue mastery for EVERY student. There’s a lot more to that than “Johnny can’t read.”
What we’re facing is another failure. Districts need to have an implementation strategy that includes bringing their educators up to speed and a reasonable timeline.
Can we talk about the literacy change process? As much as I would love for our kids to receive direct, explicit, systematic instruction, the truth is, most districts don’t know what that means in terms of PD, approach, etc. Teachers aren’t equipped. 🧵
— Krista Conway (@theliteracymom) April 7, 2024
