S5-02. Uncovering the causes of math anxiety

A blue graphic with text reading "Math Teacher Lounge" in multicolored letters and "Amplify." at the bottom, with abstract geometric shapes and lines as decoration.

We’re continuing our season theme of math anxiety, going beyond the basics, diving deeper into what causes it, and how we can help students move forward. In this episode, we talk to Dr. Erin Maloney from the University of Ottawa to better understand what’s actually happening in the brain when a person experiences math anxiety, and how we can take steps to shift student mindsets in a positive direction.
 
Listen now and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!
 
Enjoy this episode and explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page. 

Download Transcript

Dr. Erin Maloney (00:00):

It’s the anxiety itself in many ways that can cause people to underperform.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:06):

Welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge. I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson.

Dan Meyer (00:10):

And I’m Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:11):

This is episode two of our new season, all about math anxiety. Who has it? What is it? What do we do about it?

Dan Meyer (00:20):

I’m learning so much, learning a ton.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:22):

I loved our first conversation with Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, episode one, our first episode of the season. Really, our goal with that conversation was just to—we need to talk about the basics of it, for reals. Like, what is math anxiety?

Dan Meyer (00:36):

What is it? How do you measure it? How’s it defined? Super-helpful stuff.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:40):

There’s not only one way that it’s measured. But it’s like, in active research right now, how are folks making sense of it? And I think Dr. Ramirez did such a fantastic job of sharing that with our listeners. And I learned a lot. You learned a lot, Dan?

Dan Meyer (00:56):

I did. And I’m also super-excited to take that knowledge that we have developed together and go and build on top of it and keep on climbing up up the mountain here, and learn more about math anxiety. Which is why we’re super-excited to have a guest on, Dr. Maloney, who is going to help us learn more—especially about what happens to the brain when it’s experiencing math anxiety. There’s some really complex stuff that happens there, including the role of parents and educators in creating and resolving math anxiety. And I think we’ll also learn that the whole situation is a bit of a hot mess. And we’ll try to make it a little bit less messy together.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:34):

Little bit less messy. Dan, if we do nothing else, can we make it a little less messy?

Dan Meyer (01:41):

I sometimes prefer more mess, but in this case I prefer less. So.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:45):

I have a two-year-old, so everything is a mess.

Dan Meyer (01:47):

Your life is mess. Yes. <laugh> Right. Well, I’m excited for you folks to hear this. It was a delightful conversation, so yeah, tune in. We are joined by Dr. Erin Maloney.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:56):

Let’s go. We are joined by Dr. Erin Maloney, associate professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Ottawa, where she directs the Cognition and Emotion Laboratory, as well as serving as the Canada Research Chair in Academic Achievement and Well-being. Welcome to the show, Dr. Maloney. We’re so excited to have you in the Lounge.

Dr. Erin Maloney (02:20):

Yeah, thank you so much for having me. This is fantastic.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:24):

So our last season was all about math and joy. And even when I read your title, I felt more joyful. Like, somebody is thinking about academic achievement, but with well-being in mind. I love it.

Dr. Erin Maloney (02:39):

Aw, thank you.

Dan Meyer (02:40):

Cognition and emotion!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:42):

E-mo-tion!

Dr. Erin Maloney (02:43):

I don’t think they can be separate. I think that you have to think about them together, ’cause they’re so intricately connected.

Dan Meyer (02:49):

Love that. People try, but we love that. Yeah. That’s our vibe here, too.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:52):

People try. That was a big problem with my math anxiety. They just wanted…there was no room for my emotion. They’re like, stop weeping at your desk—

Dan Meyer (03:00):

It’s rearranging neurons….

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:01):

—you’re distracting the other children. So would you mind telling us the story of how you even got interested in this topic? You know, when you tell people that you study math anxiety—or, actually, I don’t know how you describe it to them; I’m hopeful you bring in that well-being part—but how did you get here? What do you, what do you, what do you…yeah, tell us! We love it!

Dr. Erin Maloney (03:23):

<laugh> I feel like what you’re actually asking is, “How did you make life choices that got you to here?” <Laugh>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:29):

Justify your life choices! Ready? Go!

Dr. Erin Maloney (03:32):

<laugh> Whoo. OK. So, all right. So we often, in psychology, we joke that instead of doing research, we do “me-search.” And that’s, that’s admittedly true in my case. I was a student who absolutely loved math up until about eighth grade, and then something changed, and all of a sudden I was terrified of math and I had absolutely no sense of self-efficacy in it. Despite trying really hard, I was extremely anxious about it. And so I initially, I set out…my parents were completely convinced that I was absolutely capable of doing mathematics and that I was getting in my own way. And when I went to university, I decided to prove them wrong. So I set out to prove that some people just can’t do math, and that’s the end of it. And, you know, 20 plus years later, my parents were right. And it turns out that many people—well, I would argue virtually everyone—can do math. And that if you are really anxious about it, it can get in the way. And interestingly, you know, in, in the years that we’ve been doing this research, there’s really good strategies that can be used—that hopefully we get a chance to chat about—that can really help reduce the amount of anxiety that students are experiencing. But I really did set out, like the bold teenager that I was, to prove my parents wrong. And that backfired <laugh>. So I know it’s kind of a strange answer, but it’s the truth. So I was really interested in understanding why it was some people just could not do math.

Dan Meyer (05:10):

That makes two for two so far, on guests for this season who did a version of me-search. And I feel like this is pretty common for a lot of researchers. Like, I wanna figure out…my experience as a teacher, the part where you, I think, diverge from a lot of people I knew in grad school, myself included, is that you actually let counter evidence change your perspective on things. Whereas I feel like a lot of us go in: “I know this is true and I’m gonna gather data!” and lo and behold, I’m true! But only now, with the research TM, you know, trademarked research, attached to it. So that’s, really exciting. Thanks for sharing that.

Dr. Erin Maloney (05:43):

No, you’re welcome.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:44):

But don’t people say that the more personal you get, the more universal it is? Right? So if you go and get your doctorate about something that you think is just your experience or in your brain, then people are gonna be gonna be like, “Wait a second; you think that too?” “Wait, that math anxiety isn’t just you?” I don’t know, it sounds like a pretty great path to me. When you tell folks that you study math anxiety or when you’re speaking to folks about your research, do you find that there is a lot of folks who relate to what you’re studying? Or how does that conversation typically go?

Dr. Erin Maloney (06:20):

Yeah, so it is I think an extremely relatable topic. Not in the sense that everyone experiences anxiety about math, but everyone seems to know somebody who’s really anxious about math. Or everyone’s at least aware of the stereotype that like some people are math people and some people aren’t, and that’s just the way it is. So it feels like everyone has feelings about math and everyone seems very happy to share those feelings. So one thing I’ve always found really interesting, and actually, so I, I know you mentioned that you had Gerardo on recently. Gerardo and I have had really interesting conversations about how people are really quick to tell you that they hate math and they can’t do math, and they’re anxious about math. And I’ve yet to have anyone ever tell me they hate reading, they can’t read, they’re really anxious about reading as an adult. So for some reason math seems really different. And in that sense people always seem to be pretty excited to talk about their feelings towards math.

Dan Meyer (07:23):

Yeah, definitely. Been on an airplane or two myself and had those conversations. You know, people asking to be reseated because they found out that I do math for a living or whatever. Or just unburdening themselves, for sure. I’m super-curious: I think that the fact that you are doing the me-search is reason enough to want to dedicate your life to this study. But I am curious: If you were gonna justify to someone else, why is math anxiety important to study? What are its consequences, even outside of math education? What would you say to that?

Dr. Erin Maloney (07:57):

So I think it’s probably not hard to convince people that success in math is important, right? So we know that children who start elementary school behind in mathematics tend to stay behind in mathematics, unless they have any kind of very targeted intervention. We know that children who do worse in mathematics throughout K to 12 education in general get lower-paying jobs when they’re older. We also know that when they do worse than mathematics relative to their peers, there’s fewer jobs that are open to them, relative to if they excelled in math. Right? And so I think in many ways there are really clear consequences for students who are not comfortable with math and who avoid it. But I think one of the really, really interesting things about math anxiety, and maybe part of why I’ve fallen in love with it as a research topic is that it’s the anxiety itself in many ways that can cause people to underperform. So it’s not just the case that people who are bad at math are anxious about it. It’s actually that the anxiety itself can cause you to do worse in math. And that for me is really exciting, ’cause it means that if we can change your mindset, then we can really set you on a path with several more options available to you career-wise. And I think that is really empowering.

Dan Meyer (09:18):

Hmm. Yeah, definitely. And I’d love for you to explore — your laboratory is the cognition and emotion laboratory, which I love, how you’re creating those linkages between how you feel about a thing and what your opportunities or your aptitude for learning it. I’m really curious, can you say more about the, the relationship there? How does feeling anxiety impair your ability to do mathematics?

Dr. Erin Maloney (09:41):

Yeah, so feeling anxiety, typically what you tend to experience is these negative thoughts and ruminations. So you can imagine, you’re somebody who doesn’t really love math, you’re pretty anxious about it; you know, Bethany, maybe you’ve had this kind of experience before. I’m gonna call you out on it. I’ve had it many times, where you sit down to do a math test and all of a sudden you’re not focusing on the actual math test in front of you. You’re focusing on things like the consequences of not doing well on this. Right? Or “my parents are gonna be really disappointed if I don’t pass this test,” or “my teacher is gonna think negatively negative of me,” or sometimes we see things like, “I’m a girl, girls don’t do math.” These types of stereotypes. And what happens is that those thoughts actually tie up really important cognitive resources, like, really important memory resources, that you need to do the math test. And so if you are trying to essentially do two things at once, right? You’re trying to deal with all these negative thoughts that are distracting you and you’re trying to do the math test, then you’re not going to do as well as someone who’s sitting down and doesn’t have all of these distracting thoughts to deal with. And we actually know that from research that we have in our lab right now, where we just ask people like, “Hey, when you did this math test, what kind of stuff are you thinking about?” what we find is that the people who are really anxious about math report a whole bunch of thoughts that are unrelated really to the math test, per se. It’s more about the consequences of doing poorly. And as a result of those thoughts, they actually end up doing worse.

Dan Meyer (11:14):

This has been really helpful to figure out, how the emotional state of doing math affects the ability to do math. And it’s really interesting how you’re saying that the direction of the causality can go from the emotions to the cognition. And I’m just curious then, what is the source of the bad emotions about math? Where does that come from? Is it nature? Is it nurture? Some combination? How do you see it?

Dr. Erin Maloney (11:39):

Yeah, so one, that’s a fantastic question. And there’s been a whole bunch of people all around the world that have been spending a lot of time really trying to pinpoint that down. And I think the answer is that it’s, you know, it’s complex. So most of what it’s looking like right now is that it is a combination of both. So essentially what we find is that kids who start elementary school who are a little bit behind in math—and for the question of why they’re behind, that’s also complex; it could be genetics, it could be just environmental input, before the child ever entered formal schooling kind of thing—but in essence, what we find is that kids that start school behind in mathematics, those are the children who are most likely to develop anxiety about math by the time they’re finished first grade. OK? But we also know that once they’ve developed the anxiety about math, then that’s when they get these thoughts and ruminations that kind of tie up those memory resources, that then is gonna make it harder for them to succeed in math tests. So you get into this sort of vicious cycle, right? Where maybe you start behind a little bit and then you develop the anxiety, the anxiety causes you to underperform relative to what you should be able to, so now you’re even further behind, you get more anxious because you’re not doing as well as you’d like to…but again, kind of coming back to the “Why are the children starting behind in the first place?” Some of that seems to be the role that parents are playing in the household. So some kids come from a household where parents are playing a lot more math games with them, talking about mathematical concepts on a regular basis. Maybe they have older siblings who are, you know, practicing arithmetic and, and mathematical processing in front of them. And so those kids are exposed to more math before they ever even start formal schooling. Those kids seem to do better. And then we also know that the parents’ attitudes matter a lot too. So what we find is that when parents are high in math anxiety themselves, especially when they help their children a lot with their math homework in really early ages, we find that those kids end up being more anxious about math by the end of the school year, and they also end up doing worse in mathematics. So it really does seem to be, you know, kind of a complex set of factors that have something to do with both maybe genetic predisposition to success in math and genetic predisposition to anxiety, but then also the social attitudes and stereotypes about math to which you’re exposed at home that really seem to be coming together to create this anxiety in young children.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (14:24):

I feel like everything you’re saying is <laugh>…it makes so much sense and yet it’s so often not talked about, right? Because it’s just more like, it gets boiled down to, “Oh, they’re just not a math person,” instead of all these other factors that are at play. And I completely remember the anxiety I felt, whether it was a test or not, walking into my math classroom when I was in ninth grade. And there’s no way I was set up and ready to learn. Right? <Laugh>. And something with—we mentioned Dr. Ramirez, he was talking about validating that anxiety. If teachers validate that like, “Oh, you know what, sometimes you might feel stumped, or this might feel overwhelming.” Even the power in creating space for that in the classroom, right? And acknowledging that it doesn’t—math doesn’t have to “come easy” to you in order for you to have access or make sense, is such a powerful concept. And I love the way that you are looking at all these different factors and saying, “Hey, it’s both simple and also a lot more complicated than we’re we’re making it.” Right?

Dr. Erin Maloney (15:36):

No, and I agree with that sentiment so much. Like, I think, though—one thing I will sort of caution is that I think when teachers are validating the anxiety, or when parents are validating the anxiety, I think there’s a very fine line that needs to be walked where we need to be able to say, you know, “It’s OK to struggle with something. That’s, that is completely OK.” And as we’re, you know, as we’re working towards something that’s really valuable, right? We can, we can work hard at something and by working hard at it, we’re going to get better. And I think that type of validating is really, really important and valuable. I think what we wanna be careful of is not to say things like, “Oh, it’s OK. I also never loved math.” And, you know, “Oh, I was never a math person either.” And so even though we might be bringing comfort to the the child, I think that that’s sending the wrong message. And so sometimes it’s really well intentioned and really not great—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:37):

A hundred percent.

Dr. Erin Maloney (16:38):

—in terms of the messaging. So that’s the only…so just for people listening, the only sort of caution that I would give there is that I think there’s nuances to the validating of the feelings that are important.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:50):

I am so glad you said that because as a kindergarten teacher, I vividly remember—and this is as early as, you know, the kids are five years old, right?—and I remember in a parent-teacher conference, a parent saying, “Oh, I wasn’t a math person either,” or, “Oh, no, ugh.” And they were so quick, like you said, they wouldn’t say that about reading, but they were so quick to talk about their lack of natural math aptitude, right? And, and it was really interesting because you know that even if they’re not saying that specific thing at home, those attitudes are absolutely carrying over at home. And they’re absolutely carrying over to, to how they interact with their kiddo around math and around what’s happening in the conversations about math. And I felt like a lot of times my work as a teacher was also to help support parents through their own math anxiety, and help give them some new language for how they can talk about math. And that math is more than just getting to an answer quickly. Like, let’s talk about, let’s go on math walks, let’s go on number walks, what numbers are around the home? Or oh, is that bigger than this? Do you have more of this? And even those little things, I, my hope was that it was starting to shift the conversation around what math was possible in the home, particularly when you saw that it was the parents who had palpable math anxiety. Right? And how much you know that that’s gonna impact what’s happening when you sit down to do homework together.

Dr. Erin Maloney (18:22):

Yeah. And I love that you have worked to encourage parents to do that. So we do similarly. Like even from a research perspective, where I will often give talks to parents and teachers and we talk about the idea of trying to mathematize everything, right? So just the idea that math is absolutely everywhere, and you know, whether it’s a matter of playing games in the car with your kids where you’re thinking of a number and it’s “My number is higher than 42, but lower than 80, and what number do you think I might be thinking of?” And, and gradually trying to get the child to that number. Or, you know, asking questions like, “What’s your favorite even number and why?” And just little things like that that, that I think can make math fun for kids, that help—I don’t even know how to explain it, but just that idea of bringing joy into it, so it’s not always this heavy subject that kids have to come to. So we definitely try to talk to parents about the idea of, like I said, mathematizing everything. And usually it’s well-received, ’cause often parents find it empowering, right? They’re like, “Oh, well, I could do that! But like, that’s not math!” And you’re like, “No, but it is.”

Dan Meyer (19:33):

Yep.

Dr. Erin Maloney (19:34):

Like, it is! And sometimes parents will say like, “Well, I don’t know how to do fractions.” And you’re like, “OK, but how do you bake?” “Well, I don’t know! I just, like, I know how to do those fractions!” And you’re like, “OK, but that’s the starting point. Let’s work with that.” Like, let’s, you know. And I think a lot of times, it’s reminding the parents that they’re actually far more capable than what they think they are, despite the fact that maybe they struggled with math when they were younger.

Dan Meyer (19:58):

Yeah. This is so interesting. And I feel like part of the challenge around conversations about anxiety and math and how to, how to resolve it and where it comes from, is that it, like, it presupposes a single definition of math. And so, you know, we’re talking about like how to be more mindful about math. But you know, like if kids were walking every day through a treacherous street, you know, the solution might not be become more mindful about that street. It’s just like, we gotta fix the treacherous nature of the street, really. You know, I love that we’re talking also about redefining what math is, making it more playful. That feels like a super-important component here. I’d love to know more about what you know about the role of gender in all of this. Are there differences in the way boys and girls experience math anxiety and how it relates to achievement in math?

Dr. Erin Maloney (20:48):

Yeah, so, there’s really, really interesting research on gender in math anxiety. So in general, we find that girls tend to experience more anxiety about math than boys do. So one hypothesis is that it has to do with just social stereotypes that, you know, girls are, are good at reading; boys are good at math, kind of thing. So there’s some evidence to suggest that that might be playing a role. There’s other evidence to suggest as well that maybe boys actually do experience as much anxiety, they just don’t really own up to it.

Dan Meyer (21:20):

Ooh, yikes.

Dr. Erin Maloney (21:21):

So thoughts are, you know, there’s a bit of an apprehension for males to admit experiencing the anxiety. But I think one of the things that is extremely interesting about it—at least to me—is that we don’t tend to see gender differences in young children. So in early elementary school, even though we’ll see that kids as young as six years old will experience anxiety about math, and that that anxiety is related to how well they do in math and how much they enjoy math, it doesn’t seem to vary as a function of gender at that young age. It doesn’t seem to be related to gender until kids are at about sixth, seventh grade that we really start to see this gender difference coming online. And so that, to me, suggests that it’s probably something more social than biological at play. It probably has something more to do with these stereotypes and stuff. But another really interesting—or at least, I’m biased, but to me—another really interesting line of research that comes into play—and some of this is stuff out of my own lab—so we know that boys in general tend to do better at spatial processing than girls. And we know that spatial processing is really important for math, right? So math and space are pretty connected. And by spatial processing, I mean things like being able to picture something rotating in your mind or, you know, envisioning how these puzzle pieces might fit together. And so we know that boys tend to do better at that type of processing. And the gender difference there seems to be related to gender differences in math anxiety. So there’s some speculation, too, that it might be that as the math starts to become more reliant on spatial processing, that that’s when we see this separation between boys and girls with respect to how much anxiety they feel about math. So a lot of this is to say, I think the answer to the gender question right now is what I think what we would officially call a bit of a hot mess, <laugh> where I think there’s probably more questions than answers. But I think that there’s definitely something going on. And it really seems to be coming on later in elementary school.

Dan Meyer (23:32):

That’s a refreshingly honest admission from a social scientist, that it’s a hot mess and not perfectly clear, <laugh> so I appreciate that. It’s interesting what you said about the spatial reasoning. In our work creating curriculum at Amplify, I find we lean a lot on trying to tie abstract math towards spatial topics. Like, can you estimate a quantity before you calculate it? Can you identify a pattern and where it breaks before you prove it abstractly? And, I dunno, it’s just interesting to me. I’m just thinking out loud about how I feel like math becomes more abstract rather than more spatial. The farther you venture into secondary math…I’m wondering if I misunderstand what you’re meaning by spatial, and the progression of math from K–12.

Dr. Erin Maloney (24:20):

Yeah, so I think you can still have—you can have math be abstract, but still really relying on spatial processing. Right? And I think part of that is maybe a bit of us having different definitions of when we say “spatial.” So in cognitive science, when we talk about spatial representations or spatial reasoning, it’s really like anything you’re picturing in your mind, any time you’re really picturing these things in your mind and manipulating those images at all. So if you imagine, even like at a simple level, but it’s gonna hold when you’re going more complex as well. So doing like equivalence problems, for example, where you have to balance the equations.

Dan Meyer (24:58):

Yeah.

Dr. Erin Maloney (24:59):

Even just being able to envision things kind of moving around that equal sign and bringing one piece of the equation from this side to the other is actually an extremely spatial kind of reasoning. Right? Or when you’re expanding, that’s actually extremely extremely spatial, despite the fact that it might not feel like it initially. Obviously anything in geometry is going to be very spatial. So I think, in that sense, we would argue that the spatial processing is still playing a pretty important role. But it’s maybe a different type of spatial processing than what we’re seeing at a very early level in elementary school. That said, you can completely disagree with me too. ‘Cause I could also just be wrong, and that’s fair. My kids tell me I’m wrong all the time. So I’m used to <laugh> being told that I’m wrong.

Dan Meyer (25:47):

Well, we’re a bit more deferential on this here show, with our guests. So I would not do that. But it makes sense, what you’re saying about how these are things that you manipulate in your mind, whether they are Xs and Ys or numbers and fractions. These are all things that we manipulate. That ties into differences in this spacial reasoning category, it sounds like, which then contributes to math anxiety. And it does start to feel like there’s a lot going on here, is what it feels like.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:14):

You mean hot mess?

Dan Meyer (26:16):

I meant hot mess.

Dr. Erin Maloney (26:17):

Yeah. <laugh>, I think that’s the technical term, right? I’m pretty sure that’s the technical term for it.

Dan Meyer (26:21):

I didn’t know the citation for it. So I didn’t say it. But I knew who in literature named that. But yeah.

Dr. Erin Maloney (26:28):

I’ll write something at some point.

Dan Meyer (26:30):

We’ll cite Maloney, 2022. Yeah. Yes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:34):

So I will say that one of my dreams in thinking about this season and last season, but particularly this season, since we’re really getting to talk to some researchers who get to think about this, and have really interesting conversations about it all the time…one of my dreams is that we’re bringing—’cause we do have some folks who are researchers that are listening, right? But then we also have teachers and folks who are in the classroom every day, and parents and caregivers listening. And so I think one of the beautiful things about the way that I hear you talking about it is you’re thinking about the research, but it’s so applicable. Right? And I wonder if there’s anything else you can say around it. I wanna reduce that divide, that gap, between the research that’s happening and then what’s happening with the kiddos and in the classroom and at home. And I don’t know if it’s like a magic wand thing where like <laugh> if there were changes you’d wanna see at a societal level, to try to combat math anxiety, but you see where I’m going. You know, it’s like <laugh>….

Dr. Erin Maloney (27:39):

  1. So I’m gonna answer maybe in two ways. So I think the first thing that I’m hearing from you is that idea of diminishing this divide, right? And so one thing I try to keep in mind, as someone who’s a researcher and working in the lab, I will often be called in to talk to teachers and give professional development sessions. And they often want the sage-on-the-stage academic, that stands up there and tells you the answers to things. And one of the first things that I’m gonna admit when I get up there is, “I am not on the front lines.” So what I do in the lab, for me to tell you that that’s gonna work in a classroom of 30 kids who may or may not have eaten dinner that day, and may or may not have snow pants, and may or not…like it’s–

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:23):

Mmm, yes.

Dr. Erin Maloney (28:24):

You know, I think we also need to be a little bit reasonable. So I try really hard in my own program of research to make sure that I’m always talking to teachers and to principals and to curriculum designers to make sure that the ideas that I have make sense. In fact, one of the most recent book chapters that I wrote, I wrote in collaboration with a really good friend of mine who’s a principal, an elementary school principal, and a former math consultant. And we wrote it together, to really say like, “Hey, here’s how we can help each other inform how research can inform practice and how practice can also inform research.” ‘Cause he can come to me and say, “I’m doing this. I can’t find anything in the literature to support this, but I’m sure it works!” And we can design something in the lab to test whether or not it seems like it’s gonna work.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:11):

That’s huge. Yeah.

Dr. Erin Maloney (29:12):

Empirically. And so I think that open communication is massive. One thing that we’re doing in my own lab to try to keep that open communication available. So to anyone listening who’s ever tried to get access to a journal article, they’re held behind paywalls, right? So one, the way it works, my understanding of this anyway, is that the journal owns the formatted version of the paper. So what we do is we put up audio recordings of all of the research papers that we ever publish. So I’m pretty sure I own the words as the author, and the journal owns the prettified version that you can buy. So we audio-record all of our papers, so that if teachers or parents ever want to hear the actual science that’s going into some of these decisions, they have access to at least the stuff that we do in our lab. And we also put up an infographic for every paper, just highlighting kind of the main questions and main findings. And we do that because I think that the only way for the information to actually be useful is if it gets into the hands of the stakeholders that actually need that information.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:21):

And is accessible. That’s huge. That’s huge!

Dr. Erin Maloney (30:24):

Yeah. Yeah. So that’s one way that we try to do it. And like I said, the other thing, we try to always be working with principals and with teachers. I joke that the way that I remedied this in my own life…so my husband’s a teacher; it’s like, I just married one! It’s fine! <laugh> I can grill him on a regular basis, and be like, “I wanna try this experiment. Do you think it’s gonna work?” And he can say, like, “It’s not going to. Here’s why.”

Dan Meyer (30:47):

That’s awesome. Marrying a participant—you know, a research participant—is unethical, of course. Would not clear IRB. But turning your partner into a participant? Like, what are you gonna do? That’s great.

Dr. Erin Maloney (30:57):

Yeah, no, that’s fair game.

Dan Meyer (30:58):

Yep.

Dr. Erin Maloney (30:59):

Yeah. So that’s—I think we we compensate each other <laugh>. So, no…so I do joke a little bit about that. He was a teacher simply ’cause he wanted to be one. Not ’cause I needed him to be one. But, I think that communication part is, is really key. That’s one thing. Then the other part of the question or the other sort of piece of the question that I was hearing is that idea of, how do we fix math anxiety. Right? Like, what’s the great, “I’m glad that there’s a whole bunch of time and effort and energy going into trying to understand this, but what, where are we at?” And I think with that, it’s really, really promising. So there’s been a lot of research coming out looking at how best to help children or even adults manage their own anxiety about math. And there’s a few really interesting strategies that seem to be quite effective. So one, and I don’t know if—um, it feels weird calling him Dr. Ramirez, just ’cause I know him well!—but I don’t know if Dr. Ramirez would’ve talked about this when he chatted with you, but he has some really interesting work on expressive writing. Did he chat about that at all?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (32:07):

He didn’t, but I’ve read some of his work about it and I think it’s so fascinating.

Dr. Erin Maloney (32:11):

Yeah! So, OK, well, I’ll tell you about his work on it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (32:13):

Yes, please. Please.

Dr. Erin Maloney (32:14):

Because it’s super-useful. So when we talked about that idea of how anxiety causes these thoughts and ruminations, and they tie up the memory resources that you need, what Gerardo has found is that when you get students to write about their anxiety for about 10 minutes before they do a test, what ends up happening is they end up doing better on the test, relative to if they would not have written about their anxiety at all. And this is particularly true for students who are really high in anxiety. OK? And the idea is that all of those thoughts that they were going to have about the test or the consequences of the test, et cetera, you just kind of get ’em…it’s like a mind dump where you get ’em all onto the page at first before you even go to do the test. And now when you go to do the test, you’re not having to do two things at once. You’re no longer dealing with these thoughts ’cause you got ’em all out on the paper beforehand. And so Gerardo has some really interesting work showing that that works for math anxiety. And then it also works for just testing anxiety in general. And so that’s a strategy that I love. I also—part of what I really love about it is it’s so low-cost, right? You need a paper and a pencil and it’s great. So those are always my favorite strategies, the ones that don’t really cost us anything. So that’s one way of dealing with like the cognitive part of the anxiety. The other thing you can do is try to deal with the anxiety part of the anxiety. So for that, what we find is that the typical strategies that you’re gonna see for anxiety tend to work for math anxiety. So things like focused breathing. Right? Making sure you’re doing deep inhales and exhales. That really diaphragmatic breathing seems to be quite helpful. We know that what we call progressive desensitization is really key. That’s the idea of doing things, you know, starting with the questions that you know how to handle. And then gradually working up to the more difficult questions. So you’re sort of gradually exposing yourself to the more complex stuff. And how that can play out on an actual test at school is, you sit down, and instead of just starting with question number one, you actually read the whole test, see which questions you feel like you know the best, start with those questions, and that helps build your confidence so that you’re better able to tackle the questions that are maybe a little bit outside of where you’re currently at. So that seems to be really helpful. The other part that I will say, too, that’s extremely helpful: So we know that anxiety really ties up those memory resources. And so the more you can make the math automatic, the more immune it’s going to be to anxiety in the moment. And so I know that this part can be a little bit controversial, because we don’t wanna necessarily demotivate children, and kill the enthusiasm for math that we’re trying to cultivate…but really, you know, really committing your arithmetic facts to memory can be extremely helpful. So really learning those times tables, really learning your addition and subtraction facts. ‘Cause what happens is, then when you’re in a situation where you need that information, even if you’re anxious and you’re working with fewer cognitive resources than what you would normally have, you actually don’t need that many cognitive resources to be able to pull something from memory that you’ve memorized. So it really helps to kind of protect you against some of the negative impacts of the anxiety while you’re doing that test.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (35:37):

And you’re not using all your cognitive resources to figure out seven times eight, because you can really focus on what you’re trying to do with that. Oh, that’s fascinating. Yeah. Yeah.

Dr. Erin Maloney (35:47):

Yes. No, a hundred percent right. And so I know that’s one that, like I said, I know it can be somewhat controversial because it’s…you know, we’ve talked about—or we haven’t talked about in this conversation, but we often talk about—the idea of drilling and killing. Right? So you drill the facts, you kill the, the enthusiasm. But I think that there are ways that we can drill arithmetic facts, or help make them automatic, but still fun, right? It doesn’t have to always be in a high-pressure kind of way.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:16):

Totally. And we’ve talked about fluency, and I’m sure we’ll talk about it more in the Lounge. And that is interesting, that link between anxiety when the fluency isn’t there, that—or, of course we hear about anxiety with timed tests, but the idea of that IS something you can do to reduce it, because you have those facts just at your ready. Right?

Dr. Erin Maloney (36:37):

Yeah. So I actually, again, I’m gonna be a little bit controversial. So I don’t hate timed tests in the way that a lot of people do. But I love time to practice. So I think once we’ve got to a point where children have a fairly decent understanding of skills, of a skill, once they’ve got a fairly decent grasp on it, then I love the idea of the timed practice. So it can be still in a low-pressure situation, where in many ways it doesn’t matter if you get the answer to the question correct. But we’re practicing doing it in a situation in which you might be feeling a little bit of pressure, but it’s not real pressure, if that makes sense. And I think that can be really, really useful for students. And again, it can be done in a fun way, right? It doesn’t have to be these super-intense ways. It can be fun. But I think that in life there are situations in which the time that it takes you to complete a problem matter. And I think that we have to make sure that we don’t get too far away from that.

Dan Meyer (37:40):

Yeah. It feels like we should do an entire other episode thinking about ways to develop that fluency and automaticity that don’t contribute to anxiety, or create further disparities between people who are high math anxiety and low math anxiety. Not a small question, I’m sure. And I appreciate you alluding to all of that. You know, this whole thing, as you said, is quite the hot mess. And I feel like you, Dr. Maloney, have helped us make this a little less messy, in our heads, and hopefully the listeners’ heads. I really appreciate that. I just love…you’ve mentioned lots of resources that you have. You’ve alluded to them: audiobook-style readings of your research, which I need ’cause I just finished, you know, Harry Potter, the seventh book, so I need a new thing to listen to like that. Also infographics. Can you tell our listeners where they can find this work of yours, and if there are any other kinds of resources that you wanna plug for our listeners here?

Dr. Erin Maloney (38:32):

Yeah, for sure. So all of our resources can be found on my lab website. So the address for that is www.ErinMaloney.ca. So there we have, like you said, the infographics and the audio articles and all that stuff. And then we also have a link to a new kids’ book out, actually, that a colleague of mine and I have published recently, that really walks through some of these strategies on combating math anxiety. The book is written as a children’s book, so it’s Peyton & Charlie Challenge Math. But it secretly is a book that would also work for adults. So if you are a parent that’s a little bit anxious about math, or a teacher that maybe is a little bit anxious, and you wanna see how some of these strategies can play out, in that book—we linked to it on the website, but it is available for purchase on Amazon. And the one thing I will say about the book, ’cause this is something that we were pretty proud of, so Sheri-Lynn Skwarchuk, who is a school psychologist, and I wrote the book. And it’s available for purchase at our cost price, so we don’t actually make any money on the book. It was literally just a way of getting some of the science out to people who might be able to benefit from it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:45):

Reducing that divide!

Dr. Erin Maloney (39:46):

Yeah, well that’s what we’re trying to do! Right? So I think in the U.S., I think it’s like $6 on Amazon. And then in terms of other resources, we’re in the process right now of creating some informational videos and and stuff like that that hopefully will be useful for parents and for teachers, just in terms of understanding a little bit more about the anxiety and understanding how to deal with the anxiety in the classroom more, at home or wherever it might be coming up.

Dan Meyer (40:15):

Well, thanks so much. I really appreciate—we appreciate!—you coming on, and hearing about how you’re trying to bridge so many different barriers from research to practice, and school to home. It’s just really inspiring. And we’d love to have you back on sometime. So thank you so much for joining us.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:29):

I feel like we’ve just hung out! Don’t you, Dan?

Dan Meyer (40:31):

Are we rolling here? Oh my gosh, we’re rolling. I just thought we’re just hanging. Yeah,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:34):

I thought we were just hanging!

Dr. Erin Maloney (40:36):

I know, I do, I really appreciate that it has a very kind of chill vibe to it.

Dan Meyer (40:41):

Chill vibe. Like a lounge.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:42):

It’s the lounge!

Dan Meyer (40:43):

Thank you. You get us; you get us. <laugh>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:45):

Dan Meyer. I was shopping for children’s books, and there was this book, and it was talking about being at home with Mom. And it’s going through all the things that the child did that day with Mom. It’s like, “We played outside, we ran through the sprinklers, we even did some homework.” And it shows them sitting at the table with the homework, that’s clearly math homework, in front of them. And the mom is like, “Harrumph!” Like a very perplexed, anxious face. And there’s all these question marks above her. And it’s just like,

Dan Meyer (41:24):

“There should not be numbers on that paper!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:25):

Exactly. And the child is like, “Ohhhh,” you know. And I mean, I have to give credit to the illustrator, because they really did capture the clear message of this interaction, which was sitting down to do math homework or think about math together is a source of angst. Right? According to this author and according to too many people. And so I think what’s really important is that we recognize those images when we see them out there and speak back to them, and say, “Hey, wait a second.” Yeah, it can feel like that, and it doesn’t have to. And what’s going on that that’s just the assumed way that it’s gonna feel, to sit down and math together. You know?

Dan Meyer (42:11):

Yeah. It feels like we all have a lot of work to do on the whole math-anxiety front. Dr. Maloney helped us see how parents play a part, educators play a part, society and how they create people plays its own part in how we all define math as a thing where we evaluate student thought or where students play it with their thoughts, has its own huge part as well. So yeah, it was a really fantastic conversation with Dr. Maloney. I hope you folks will check out the show notes, where you will find links to Dr. Maloney’s website. A lot of her work, which as you heard, is very geared towards practitioners and parents and even directly at kids, especially the new children’s book she co-authored, Peyton & Charlie Challenge Math.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:55):

Next time we’re gonna dive even more into the nitty gritty of combating math anxiety. To do that, we’re actually gonna be joined—I am so excited about this—by Dr. Rosemarie Truglio from Sesame Workshop.

Rosemarie Truglio (43:09):

Our core audience are two- to four-year-olds, and they love math. And what’s not to love? Children don’t come with this math anxiety. Math anxiety is learned.

Dan Meyer (43:23):

So excited.

Dr. Erin Maloney (43:24):

Sesame Street was a huge part of my childhood and my toddler doesn’t know it yet, but Sesame Street is coming. It’s coming. Like, we’re we’re gonna introduce Sesame Street to him. We just haven’t yet.

Dan Meyer (43:37):

Sesame Street straight raised me.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (43:38):

Right?

Dan Meyer (43:39):

Yeah. Don’t tell my parents. But that’s, yeah, that’s true. I’m excited, too. It’s gonna be a blast.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (43:45):

I’m really excited. I think that the more we dive into this topic—which, again, we’re gonna look at math anxiety from a lot of different angles—and I’m excited to talk to Dr. Truglio about how we can take this research and these conversations that are happening about math and how it can actually impact what’s happening in homes. ‘Cause we wanna help create positive relationships with mathematics, with kids in math. I’m so excited. And I hope you folks keep listening. We love having you here in the Lounge. And if you haven’t already, please subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge, wherever you get podcasts. And if you like what you’re hearing, please leave us a rating and a review. It helps more listeners to find the show, and let other folks know about this show. Recommendations are great. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dr. Erin Maloney says about math

“If we can change their mindset, then we can set students on a path to more opportunities and success.”

–Dr. Erin Maloney

Associate Professor in the School of Psychology, Director of the Cognition and Emotion Laboratory, and the Canada Research Chair (Tier II) in Academic Achievement and Well-Being, all at the University of Ottawa

Meet the guest

Erin Maloney is an Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair at the University of Ottawa. Her research sits at the intersection of Cognitive Psychology, Developmental Psychology, and Education and focuses on cognitive and emotional factors that relate to academic achievement. She is a world-renowned expert on the study of math anxiety, conducting research in the lab, in homes, and in classrooms with children, parents, and their teachers. She is passionate about both knowledge mobilization and equity, diversity, and inclusion within education and science.

A woman with straight, shoulder-length light brown hair smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with geometric accents on a white background—perfect for a math teacher lounge or sharing math teacher resources.
A laptop displaying a Facebook group page for "Math Teacher Lounge Community," featuring profile photos, a group banner, and geometric shapes in the image background.

About Math Teacher Lounge

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Power up your Science of Reading knowledge: 2024 podcast recap

Amplify’s Science of Reading: The Podcast won both Silver and the Listeners’ Choice Award in the education category at the 2024 Signal Awards! If you haven’t already, we hope you’ll join those who have helped catapult the podcast to more than six million downloads.

You’re welcome to binge-listen all 29 podcast episodes released in 2024, but here, we’ve selected a few to highlight for you.

The power of the Science of Reading

Some context: As you probably know, the Science of Reading is a much-researched area alongside the science of learning. Applying cognitive, neuroscience, and educational principles, it helps us understand and improve how students acquire and develop reading skills. This knowledge is essential because, while humans typically learn to speak naturally, reading (and writing) require formal instruction. According to the Simple View of Reading, reading comprehension is the product of both decoding and linguistic comprehension. So kids must be taught the relationships between sounds and letters, and how to decode words. Systematic instruction presents these skills in a logical order, explicit instruction goes beyond just “exposing” kids to words and texts, and cumulative instruction builds on skills learned before.

The episodes below are a great start to exploring the fundamentals of evidence-based instruction beginning in early literacy. You’ll hear about the importance of knowledge building, the symbiosis between reading and writing, and the power of multilingual learning, just to name a few topics.

The power of knowledge

Season 8 focuses on why knowledge is so critical for literacy development and how educators can empower students to build it.

Many of us (as students and educators) were taught or trained with comprehension framed as a skill. But award-winning researcher and author Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D., says (spoiler!) that comprehension is not a skill to be taught in a vacuum, but rather an outcome—of strong decoding, vocabulary, and background knowledge. “If students can’t read words or don’t know what they mean, emphasizing comprehension is just the wrong priority,” she says. Vaughn stresses the importance of systematically building background knowledge through coherent, high-level informational texts and relevant content lessons, enabling students to connect ideas and deepen understanding. By focusing on these foundational elements, educators can support comprehension and meaningful learning.

Episode 11: Cognitive load theory: Four items at a time, with Greg Ashman, Ph.D.

Drawing from his book A Little Guide for Teachers: Cognitive Load Theory, deputy principal and professor Greg Ashman argues that students need to build a strong foundation of knowledge in order to think and learn effectively. He challenges the idea of leaving students to “figure things out” on their own. “Kids are not little scientists,” he says, and advocates instead for structured instruction to build the schemas necessary for deeper learning.

Ashman also recommends reducing extra cognitive load—distractions that overwhelm working memory—and cautions against overrelying on approaches like “productive failure,” which can frustrate students who happen to lack relevant foundational knowledge. His advice: Use evidence-based methods and prioritize clear, incremental instruction.

The power of evidence-based literacy instruction

Season 9 dives deep into the key principles of and latest developments in the Science of Reading.

Episode 3: Know the non-negotiables in a program aligned to the Science of Reading, with Kari Kurto

Kari Kurto, national Science of Reading project director with the Reading League, discusses the organization’s curriculum evaluation tool designed to assess research-based practices in reading programs. Drawing from her experience teaching students with dyslexia, Kurto emphasizes the necessity of explicit, systematic instruction in phonics and (like Ashman) the importance of reducing extraneous cognitive load.

She says one must-have for any effective, evidence-based curriculum is explicit instruction in phonics through a clear scope and sequence, which ensures that students build foundational skills, such as phonemic awareness, in a systematic way. “No program is perfect, but understanding both its strengths and areas for improvement allows schools to maximize its impact,” she says.

Episode 4: Comprehension is not a skill, with Hugh Catts, Ph.D.

Hugh Catts, like Vaughn, continues to challenge us to rethink reading comprehension. “Comprehension isn’t the purpose of reading,” says Catts, a professor at Florida State University. “The purpose of reading is whatever you’re reading for.” Whether scanning for a fact, grasping the gist, or diving deep into a complex topic, comprehension varies based on the reader’s intent and context. He also urges educators to do what the evidence asserts: Move beyond isolated skill drills to content-rich instruction that builds knowledge and engages students meaningfully. Catts notes that comprehension grows over time, as students develop mental models and apply critical thinking in a variety of reading contexts.

The power of multilingualism

In this special miniseries, our podcast focuses on how the Science of Reading serves multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs).

Episode 1: Language is always an asset, with Kajal Patel Below

Kajal Patel Below, Amplify’s vice president of biliteracy, highlights why language is such a powerful asset, and how multilingualism is not a barrier, but a gift. “Literacy in a new language builds from literacy in the home language,” she says.

But that’s not—yet—the prevailing view. Multilingual and English learners often face challenges like being left out of research or misidentified in assessments. Below also notes schools focus too much on phonics and foundational skills, sometimes overlooking the equally important elements of language comprehension, vocabulary, and speaking skills.

With the number of multilingual learners growing fast in the U.S., Below calls for schools and educators to embrace bilingual education, create stronger resources, and celebrate the unique strengths these students bring to the classroom.

More to explore

Achieve life-changing results with the
Science of Reading—we’ll show you how.

Watching students learn to read is magic. But knowing how they get there? That’s science.

Making the shift to the Science of Reading is commendable, but it is no small feat. Our extensive experience, field-tested resources, and stories of literacy success will help you deliver the true transformation you need in your district—and see the results your students deserve.

An illustration of a brain with superimposed images: handwriting, cursive letters, and the words "once upon a time" arranged in a sequence.

Exploring the Science of Writing

Discover the captivating journey of writing with our new guide, Science of Writing: A Primer. This resource delves into the history of writing, highlights the crucial link between combining reading and writing instruction, and reveals why handwriting still matters in today’s digital world. Designed to complement CKLA 3rd Edition and our other literacy tools, this primer is set to become a trusted companion, just like those before it.

MTSS Playbook

Explore our new ebook designed to help you build an evidence-based Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) tailored to diverse literacy goals. This resource provides actionable steps and essential questions to fortify your MTSS with the Science of Reading, enhancing its effectiveness and achieving better outcomes for your students.

Woman and child smiling while reading a book, with colorful cartoon animals in the background.
Cover of a "Change Management Playbook" guide, featuring two women reviewing a tablet and a teacher in an orange sweater instructing a classroom—highlighting K–5 literacy instruction and effective science of reading resources.

The science of teaching reading, coupled with the art of change management

Shifting to the Science of Reading isn’t just an overnight curriculum swap—it’s a profound culture change with multiple stages and stakeholders. We’ve helped educators succeed in that shift for years, and now we’re here to guide you every step of the way. Through each stage of implementation, our Change Management Playbook will help you mobilize your practice, process, and people to make the shift that matters most.

What is the Science of Reading?

Learning to read is not innate, but it can be taught—and science tells us how. The Science of Reading refers to the vast body of growing research that deconstructs how children learn to read, and the instructional practices that can get them there.

Reading fluency requires a complex combination of skills, taught explicitly and systematically. There are two main frameworks that can help us break it all down: The Simple View of Reading and Scarborough’s Rope.

Two schoolgirls in green uniforms look at a notebook together in a classroom. Science of Reading and book icons are overlaid on the image.
Cover of a guide titled "Science of Reading: A New Teacher’s Guide" by Amplify, featuring a teacher with two children and educational icons.

Science of Reading starter kit for new teachers

New to the classroom? We’ve compiled a collection of resources and insights about the Science of Reading to help you acquire more knowledge and build confidence. You’ll find the tools, information, and support you need to foster successful readers and writers in your classroom this school year—and beyond.

The Simple View of Reading

The Simple View of Reading, formulated by Philip Gough and William Tunmer in 1986, is the theory that proficient reading requires two main components:

Flowchart illustrating skilled reading as the product of language comprehension and word recognition, grounded in the science of reading.
A diagram with intertwining orange, yellow, and blue lines converging and diverging, illustrating interconnected pathways on a black background—reflecting the dynamic flow of ideas found in Core Knowledge or Amplify CKLA curricula.

The Reading Rope

The Reading Rope, developed by Dr. Hollis Scarborough in 2001, helps us visualize the strands of specific skills and instruction that support students in decoding and comprehension.

Professional development to support your shift to the Science of Reading

Ignite literacy transformation with Amplify’s Science of Reading: The Learning Lab—an inspiring three-course series.

  • Dive into a comprehensive overview with course one, Foundations to the Science of Reading.
  • Examine assessments and their roles in course two, Advanced Topics in the Science of Reading: Assessment and Reading Difficulties.
  • Apply effective literacy instruction to your classroom in course three, Applied Structured Literacy.

Crafted to the standards of the International Dyslexia Association, this self-paced online series provides unparalleled, research-backed instruction. Explore enriching activities, curated resources, and learn from Susan Lambert, chief academic officer and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast.

The best investment you can make is in knowledge, and the returns are priceless.

Illustration of a webpage titled "Science of Reading: The Learning Lab series" with icons of a book, paper, and other subjects below the title.

Learn more about the online courses or request a quote!

Two labeled course cards: "Course 1: Foundations to the Science of Reading" and "Course 2: Advanced Topics in the Science of Reading," with a shopping cart icon in the top right.

Tap into individual online course seats.

Science of Reading podcast cover image open book

Science of Reading: The Podcast

Tune in to hear the latest insights and trends in early reading, right from leading literacy experts and practitioners.

Listen now

Build your background knowledge of the Science of Reading.

Our Science of Reading principles and primers explain the essentials: what the Science of Reading is, how it works, and why it matters for every student.

An infographic titled "Science of Reading principles" showcases ten evidence-based K–5 literacy instruction strategies, informed by interdisciplinary research, in color-coded boxes with a "NEW" badge in the top right corner.

New Science of Reading principles placemat!

Decades of research inform the updated Science of Reading principles placemat. Use these insights as a guide for evidence-based literacy instruction—perfect for committed educators aiming to achieve real improvements in student reading outcomes.

Download principles

An illustration of a girl running with a colorful kite, with text reading "Science of Reading: A Primer | Part One" and "Amplify" in the top left corner, highlighting K–5 literacy instruction.

Science of Reading
A Primer: Part 1

In part 1 of our definitive Science of Reading primer, we discuss literacy as a societal goal, walk you through how the brain learns to decode and comprehend text, and present the patterns that top-performing schools and districts follow to achieve early reading success.

Download primer 1

Illustration of two people atop a yellow pyramid, with text reading "Science of Reading: A Primer | Part Two"—an engaging look at K–5 literacy instruction. "Amplify" appears in the top left corner.

Science of Reading
A Primer: Part 2

In part 2 of our Science of Reading primer, we establish the importance of prior knowledge for comprehension, lay out the process of micro-comprehension, and demonstrate how literacy skills build on and accelerate themselves.

Download primer 2

A woman with long dark hair smiles in front of a plain background, reflecting the joy she finds in interdisciplinary research. She is wearing a dark green top and earrings.
“If you’re looking for a Science of Reading training, the [Science of Reading: Foundations to the Science of Reading] online course is great. It helps you build background knowledge on learning how students learn how to read, and then it goes deeper and it gives you strategies that correlate with those findings that you can implement right into your classroom.”

—Allie Appel, Instructional Coach

School District of Arcadia, WI

Why undertake this crucial change?

When we bring proven methods based on the Science of Reading into schools, we make sure kids are learning to read and help teachers and caregivers support a culture of reading. Together, we can solve the reading crisis and make literacy a reality everywhere.

You’ll change lives with literacy.

According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 35% of fourth graders in the United States are proficient in reading. But schools using a Science of Reading approach have seen significant improvements in literacy rates. Using research-based methods, educators can help give all children the chance to become successful readers.

Young boy in a classroom sits at a desk and writes on a worksheet, with other children working at nearby desks in the background.
A laptop screen displaying a literacy intervention game with a cartoon llama in a desert setting and a word selection task presented to a child’s avatar in the corner.

You’ll build a foundation with explicit, systematic skills instruction.

Reading skills don’t come naturally. We actually need to rewire our brains with intentional, structured literacy instruction—starting with sounds.

You’ll improve outcomes with knowledge building.

Longitudinal research shows that knowledge building doesn’t just happen as a result of reading, but is also a vital prerequisite for and component of it. And when delivered intentionally and systematically, knowledge delivers literacy results.

Illustration depicting diverse people engaged in various activities, including astronauts in space, a musician engaged in interdisciplinary research, and a child drawing, set against a whimsical celestial backdrop.
A person with long braided hair, wearing oversized glasses, earrings, a necklace, and a red top, smiles at the camera against a plain background.
“It’s not just about the curriculum. It’s about the science behind how people, how children, and how we as humans learn to read… It’s working. I wish I had this years ago. ”

—Javonna Mack, Lead Content Teacher

Caddo Parish Schools, Louisiana

Science of Reading & Early Literacy Resources FAQ

Amplify understands that making the shift to the Science of Reading is no small feat. Get some early literacy resources and guidance with our Science of Reading FAQ.

Learning to read is not innate. It needs to be taught intentionally and systematically—and science tells us how. The vast and growing body of research on early literacy is referred to as the Science of Reading. It draws on extensive research in cognitive science, linguistics, and neuroscience. It emphasizes the systematic teaching of foundational skills—such as phonics, phonological awareness, and decoding—in building vocabulary and comprehension. In other words, it deconstructs the processes behind how children learn to read, and provides evidence for the instructional practices and early literacy resources that can get them there.

Read more 

The Science of Reading refers to the pedagogy and practices proven by extensive research to effectively teach children how to read. It places a strong emphasis on both components of the Simple View of Reading, demonstrating that systematic and explicit instruction in phonics and and intentionally sequenced knowledge building are critical to reading success.

In a balanced literacy environment, learning happens through reading and writing immersion, where the need for explicit instruction in phonics is recognized but is not the primary focus.

The key difference between the approaches lies in their emphasis on foundational reading skills and a coherent approach to building language comprehension.

A balanced literacy approach typically includes a combination of whole language approaches (emphasizing meaning and context) and phonics instruction. Balanced literacy instruction is designed to be flexible and open to interpretation by the instructor. It may include the three-cueing system, which encourages students to rely on syntactic and semantic clues in a text to read an unfamiliar word, rather than decoding (Does it look right? Does it sound right? Does it make sense?). Balanced literacy practitioners may also use leveled reading to differentiate instruction, which can can limit vocabulary exposure, hinder in-depth comprehension skills, and further widen achievement gaps.

Balanced literacy has long been a popular approach to reading instruction, with educators appreciating its openness to variation. But advocates for the Science of Reading argue that an evidence-based approach aligned with known cognitive processes and a focus on foundational skills and language comprehension provides the most solid foundation for reading instruction—for confident and struggling readers alike.

Read more

According to our friends at The Reading League, the Science of Reading is important not because it gives us an effective way to teach reading, but because it gives us the most effective way to teach reading.

“The Science of Reading is critical because it emphasizes evidence-based instruction. Decades of scientific research on reading have consistently shown the most effective ways to teach reading. The Science of Reading incorporates this research, which includes phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.”

The Reading League also takes it to the next level: What happens when all children have access to the most effective early literacy and reading education? “We believe in a future where a collective focus on applying the Science of Reading through teacher and leader preparation, classroom application, and community engagement will elevate and transform every community, every nation, through the power of literacy.”

The Science of Reading has identified five foundational reading skills that are considered crucial for early reading development. One of those skills is phonics. In other words, the Science of Reading has established that phonics are crucial, but the Science of Reading is not the same as phonics.

Phonics instruction helps students learn how to sound out and blend letters to read words accurately. As we know from the Simple View of Reading, two fundamental skills are required for reading with comprehension:

  1. Decoding—the ability to recognize written words (via phonics)
  2. Language comprehension—understanding what words mean

And the Science of Reading also reminds us that students do not have to learn phonics or decoding before knowledge comes into the equation. “The background knowledge that children bring to a text is also a contributor to language comprehension,” says Sonia Cabell, Ph.D., associate professor at Florida State University’s School of Teacher Education, on Science of Reading: The Podcast.

The Science of Reading is an evolving field built on decades of high-quality, evidence-based research that continually integrates new insights gathered from cognitive neuroscience, psychology, and linguistics. These ongoing studies constantly refine our understanding of how the human brain processes language and learning, enabling more personalized and effective teaching strategies that can adapt to the wide-ranging learning needs of students.

Like other sciences such as medicine, astronomy, or engineering – new advancements in reading technology allow us to understand how the brain works and refine our practices. Every scientific advancement in this field of reading science deepens our comprehension of reading-related challenges like dyslexia and informs the development of evidence-based interventions. We don’t believe that the Science of Reading can be reduced to a fad or trend. Rather, it is a continually evolving, enduringly effective discipline, grounded in rigorous research and driven by the quest for better comprehension of how we read and learn.

Assessment grounded in the Science of Reading can help identify children at risk of dyslexia at the earliest possible moments, creating the widest opportunity for intervention.

People with dyslexia often experience challenges in phonological awareness. They may struggle to break down words into their component sounds and to recognize the relationships between letters and sounds. Systematic and explicit instruction in phonics and phonological awareness can help individuals with dyslexia develop necessary phonological skills. This evidence-based instruction can also help students who have difficulty with decoding.

Further, evidence-based comprehension instruction, including explicit instruction in vocabulary and comprehension strategies, can support students with dyslexia in understanding and making meaning from text.

Download our free dyslexia toolkit

The Science of Reading can be integrated with a Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) to provide comprehensive and targeted reading instruction for all students. The Science of Reading aligns with a tiered model by providing evidence-based practices for instruction at each tier. An MTSS includes universal screening to identify students at risk of reading difficulties; the Science of Reading can also guide the selection of screening measures to assess specific foundational skills. Aligning the Science of Reading with an MTSS framework can also enhance instructional practices and interventions, ensure data-driven decision making, and help meet the needs of all students.

Read more

Integrating the Science of Reading and the Science of Writing strengthens our approach to teaching literacy. Reading and writing are interdependent. Understanding how sentences are built not only contributes to better reading comprehension, it also helps writers develop clear, logical text. As students grow as readers, they also grow as writers, leading to a comprehensive literacy education. Clear thinking and effective writing are crucial for expressing ideas. By fostering both skills, teachers better support students in becoming confident readers and writers, prepared for academic challenges and beyond.

One of the research-based frameworks used in the Science of Reading is the Simple View of Reading. According to the Simple View, two cognitive capacities are needed for proficient reading: (1) understanding the language (comprehension) and (2) recognizing words in print (decoding). A true Science of Reading program is designed from the start for students to build these skills, in a developmentally appropriate way.

It will also emphasize the importance of knowledge building by exposing students to a diverse array of new topics spanning history, science, and literature, organized intentionally and coherently within and across grades. Deep and intentionally sequenced knowledge domains will help build a student’s vocabulary and understanding of complex texts. And it will include instruction in  all five foundational skills: phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.

Download our free ebookScience of Reading: Making the Shift, which includes a checklist of what to look for in a curriculum based on the Science of Reading. Learn more from our friends at The Reading League.

Actually, we have a full literacy suite built on the Science of Reading! It includes:

  • mCLASS® assessment, powered by DIBELS® 8th Edition, a gold-standard universal and dyslexia screener, plus a progress monitoring tool, all in one.
  • Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA), which provides explicit, systematic foundational skills instruction combined with intentional knowledge building.
  • Boost Reading, a highly adaptive personalized reading program that reinforces the core curriculum and supports enrichment, remediation, and intervention for each student in your classroom.
  • mCLASS Intervention, a staff-led intervention program targeted to Tiers 2 and 3, made easy with automatic data-driven grouping and sequenced explicit, systematic skills lesson plans to support at-risk students.

Reading requires deliberate, systematic attention—and so does shifting to the Science of Reading in your school or district. It requires not only the right curriculum, but also all-new mindsets, metrics, and more. Reflecting years of experience supporting real educators, our resources will walk you through the process of change management in your community—and show you why the shift is worth it. View our Science of Reading change management playbook.

Learning to read is not innate. It needs to be taught intentionally and systematically—and science tells us how. The vast and growing body of research on early literacy is referred to as the Science of Reading. It draws on extensive research in cognitive science, linguistics, and neuroscience. It emphasizes the systematic teaching of foundational skills—such as phonics, phonological awareness, and decoding—in building vocabulary and comprehension. In other words, it deconstructs the processes behind how children learn to read, and provides evidence for the instructional practices and early literacy resources that can get them there.

Read more 

The Science of Reading refers to the pedagogy and practices proven by extensive research to effectively teach children how to read. It places a strong emphasis on both components of the Simple View of Reading, demonstrating that systematic and explicit instruction in phonics and and intentionally sequenced knowledge building are critical to reading success.

In a balanced literacy environment, learning happens through reading and writing immersion, where the need for explicit instruction in phonics is recognized but is not the primary focus.

The key difference between the approaches lies in their emphasis on foundational reading skills and a coherent approach to building language comprehension.

A balanced literacy approach typically includes a combination of whole language approaches (emphasizing meaning and context) and phonics instruction. Balanced literacy instruction is designed to be flexible and open to interpretation by the instructor. It may include the three-cueing system, which encourages students to rely on syntactic and semantic clues in a text to read an unfamiliar word, rather than decoding (Does it look right? Does it sound right? Does it make sense?). Balanced literacy practitioners may also use leveled reading to differentiate instruction, which can can limit vocabulary exposure, hinder in-depth comprehension skills, and further widen achievement gaps.

Balanced literacy has long been a popular approach to reading instruction, with educators appreciating its openness to variation. But advocates for the Science of Reading argue that an evidence-based approach aligned with known cognitive processes and a focus on foundational skills and language comprehension provides the most solid foundation for reading instruction—for confident and struggling readers alike.

Read more

According to our friends at The Reading League, the Science of Reading is important not because it gives us an effective way to teach reading, but because it gives us the most effective way to teach reading.

“The Science of Reading is critical because it emphasizes evidence-based instruction. Decades of scientific research on reading have consistently shown the most effective ways to teach reading. The Science of Reading incorporates this research, which includes phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.”

The Reading League also takes it to the next level: What happens when all children have access to the most effective early literacy and reading education? “We believe in a future where a collective focus on applying the Science of Reading through teacher and leader preparation, classroom application, and community engagement will elevate and transform every community, every nation, through the power of literacy.”

The Science of Reading has identified five foundational reading skills that are considered crucial for early reading development. One of those skills is phonics. In other words, the Science of Reading has established that phonics are crucial, but the Science of Reading is not the same as phonics.

Phonics instruction helps students learn how to sound out and blend letters to read words accurately. As we know from the Simple View of Reading, two fundamental skills are required for reading with comprehension:

  1. Decoding—the ability to recognize written words (via phonics)
  2. Language comprehension—understanding what words mean

And the Science of Reading also reminds us that students do not have to learn phonics or decoding before knowledge comes into the equation. “The background knowledge that children bring to a text is also a contributor to language comprehension,” says Sonia Cabell, Ph.D., associate professor at Florida State University’s School of Teacher Education, on Science of Reading: The Podcast.

The Science of Reading is an evolving field built on decades of high-quality, evidence-based research that continually integrates new insights gathered from cognitive neuroscience, psychology, and linguistics. These ongoing studies constantly refine our understanding of how the human brain processes language and learning, enabling more personalized and effective teaching strategies that can adapt to the wide-ranging learning needs of students.

Like other sciences such as medicine, astronomy, or engineering – new advancements in reading technology allow us to understand how the brain works and refine our practices. Every scientific advancement in this field of reading science deepens our comprehension of reading-related challenges like dyslexia and informs the development of evidence-based interventions. We don’t believe that the Science of Reading can be reduced to a fad or trend. Rather, it is a continually evolving, enduringly effective discipline, grounded in rigorous research and driven by the quest for better comprehension of how we read and learn.

Assessment grounded in the Science of Reading can help identify children at risk of dyslexia at the earliest possible moments, creating the widest opportunity for intervention.

People with dyslexia often experience challenges in phonological awareness. They may struggle to break down words into their component sounds and to recognize the relationships between letters and sounds. Systematic and explicit instruction in phonics and phonological awareness can help individuals with dyslexia develop necessary phonological skills. This evidence-based instruction can also help students who have difficulty with decoding.

Further, evidence-based comprehension instruction, including explicit instruction in vocabulary and comprehension strategies, can support students with dyslexia in understanding and making meaning from text.

Download our free dyslexia toolkit

The Science of Reading can be integrated with a Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) to provide comprehensive and targeted reading instruction for all students. The Science of Reading aligns with a tiered model by providing evidence-based practices for instruction at each tier. An MTSS includes universal screening to identify students at risk of reading difficulties; the Science of Reading can also guide the selection of screening measures to assess specific foundational skills. Aligning the Science of Reading with an MTSS framework can also enhance instructional practices and interventions, ensure data-driven decision making, and help meet the needs of all students.

Read more

Integrating the Science of Reading and the Science of Writing strengthens our approach to teaching literacy. Reading and writing are interdependent. Understanding how sentences are built not only contributes to better reading comprehension, it also helps writers develop clear, logical text. As students grow as readers, they also grow as writers, leading to a comprehensive literacy education. Clear thinking and effective writing are crucial for expressing ideas. By fostering both skills, teachers better support students in becoming confident readers and writers, prepared for academic challenges and beyond.

One of the research-based frameworks used in the Science of Reading is the Simple View of Reading. According to the Simple View, two cognitive capacities are needed for proficient reading: (1) understanding the language (comprehension) and (2) recognizing words in print (decoding). A true Science of Reading program is designed from the start for students to build these skills, in a developmentally appropriate way.

It will also emphasize the importance of knowledge building by exposing students to a diverse array of new topics spanning history, science, and literature, organized intentionally and coherently within and across grades. Deep and intentionally sequenced knowledge domains will help build a student’s vocabulary and understanding of complex texts. And it will include instruction in  all five foundational skills: phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.

Download our free ebookScience of Reading: Making the Shift, which includes a checklist of what to look for in a curriculum based on the Science of Reading. Learn more from our friends at The Reading League.

Actually, we have a full literacy suite built on the Science of Reading! It includes:

  • mCLASS® assessment, powered by DIBELS® 8th Edition, a gold-standard universal and dyslexia screener, plus a progress monitoring tool, all in one.
  • Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA), which provides explicit, systematic foundational skills instruction combined with intentional knowledge building.
  • Boost Reading, a highly adaptive personalized reading program that reinforces the core curriculum and supports enrichment, remediation, and intervention for each student in your classroom.
  • mCLASS Intervention, a staff-led intervention program targeted to Tiers 2 and 3, made easy with automatic data-driven grouping and sequenced explicit, systematic skills lesson plans to support at-risk students.

Reading requires deliberate, systematic attention—and so does shifting to the Science of Reading in your school or district. It requires not only the right curriculum, but also all-new mindsets, metrics, and more. Reflecting years of experience supporting real educators, our resources will walk you through the process of change management in your community—and show you why the shift is worth it. View our Science of Reading change management playbook.

The Science of Reading and middle school

The power of the Science of Reading doesn’t end in elementary school. Evidence-based reading instruction is equally critical for developing strong, proficient readers in middle school and beyond.

What is the Science of Reading?

The Science of Reading is the robust body of research that:

  • Illuminates how the brain processes reading, providing insights into both decoding and language comprehension.
  • Breaks down the distinct components of literacy development and shows how to address those components explicitly and systematically.
  • Offers educators actionable strategies and an evidence-based road map to fluent reading.

By understanding the neurological pathways involved in—and built by—reading, educators can tailor their instruction to better meet the diverse needs of all their students.

How does the Science of Reading apply to middle school?

The Simple View of Reading and the Reading Rope are core models that illustrate the essential—and interconnected—components of successful reading and how students move through them as they build literacy. Together, the two provide a detailed map for strengthening the interdependent skills of decoding and comprehension.

Middle school students are drawing on all components of the Reading Rope as they encounter increasingly sophisticated text. They require instructional techniques that nurture advanced language comprehension skills and continue to support key fluency skills. This involves continuing to build background knowledge, deliberately targeting key areas of language comprehension that arise in the text, and reinforcing foundational skills, all in order to address the increasing language demands of their educational journey.

Science of Reading and middle school: A critical moment

The middle school years are a pivotal and transformative period in reading development—just when students are also experiencing significant cognitive, emotional, and social growth. Integrating the Science of Reading into your curriculum can help students bridge any gaps, empowering them to move from basic reading skills to complex, critical reading skills at a time when strong reading comprehension becomes essential.

The importance of challenging, grade-level texts

Middle school students are on their way to becoming skilled readers, and need a unique balance of structured and independent opportunities to explore a range of texts, gathering information as they read. Key to the Science of Reading, exposure to varied texts helps middle schoolers continue building their vocabulary and background knowledge.

Providing all students access to diverse, grade-level texts challenges them, both as readers and critical thinkers, while treating them with dignity and respect as learners.

A key period in social and cognitive development

Middle schoolers are driven by social connection. They typically thrive in learning environments that incorporate collaborative activities and peer interaction. This synergy not only supports learning, but also enhances engagement and motivation—forming a powerful cycle.

Cognitively, adolescent students are increasingly able to handle abstract concepts, prefer active learning experiences, and are energized by authentic instruction and cognitively challenging work that is connected to the world beyond the classroom.1

1Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184; and NMSA (2010). https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00028312037001153

Science of Reading-driven instruction for middle schoolers

Aligning literacy practices to the Science of Reading provides the best systematic, explicit, and engaging instruction for middle schoolers, empowering teachers to target the areas where students need the most support.

A lively middle school classroom buzzes with students eagerly raising their hands, engaged in the comprehensive language arts curriculum. Educational posters line the walls, enhancing the learning atmosphere as they face their teacher at the front.

Effective literacy strategies

To develop essential literacy and critical thinking abilities, students should concentrate on key skills through meaningful engagement with core content. The most effective method goes beyond isolated “skill-building” exercises; instead, it embraces an integrated approach that involves:

  1. Building background knowledge.
  2. Encouraging engagement with sequenced, grade-level materials.
  3. Spending dedicated time on vocabulary and word study.
  4. Interactive exercises, such as read-alouds and collaborative discussions.

Writing and reading build on each other. Through the Science of Reading, integrating evidence-based writing instruction with reading instruction offers students a holistic approach to literacy that reinforces understanding and promotes seamless expression of ideas.

Guided support and interventions

As Tim Shanahan, Ph.D., literacy expert and author, writes, “Be on the lookout for kids who are not able to decode proficiently. It doesn’t matter the source of those problems…they need to be identified.”

Through evidence-based literacy instruction and explicit, differentiated support for students who need it, educators can adapt their teaching to meet their middle school students where they are academically, socially, and developmentally—ensuring they continue to advance toward being capable, inspired, and lifelong readers and writers.

Want to change your middle schoolers’ lives with the Science of Reading?

We’re here to help! Speak with a representative to get started.

Welcome, K–8 Reviewers!

We’re honored to introduce you to Amplify Desmos Math California. We’re confident you’ll find this comprehensive program to be a powerful tool for bringing the vision of the California Math Framework to life in classrooms across the state.

Please start with the video on the right to learn how to navigate the program and access key features referenced within our submission. Below you’ll find additional resources to support your review.

Your Review Samples

As a curriculum that incorporates both print and digital resources, it’s important that you explore both our physical materials (delivered to you in grade-specific tubs) and our digital materials (accessible through our platform). We invite you to explore both types of resources using the instructions and tips below.

Print Samples

Your print samples should have arrived in grade-specific tubs with a copy of two Reviewer binders. The K-5 Reviewer binder is contained within the Grade K shipping box and the Grade 6-8 Reviewer binder can be located in the Grade 6 shipping box. As you begin the process of organizing your materials, please refer to the inventory checklist found inside each tub as well as within your Reviewer Binder.

Digital Samples

In order to access your digital samples, you’ll need to log into our platform using your unique login credentials found on a Digital Access Flyer inside of your Reviewer Binder. Once you have located the flyer:

  • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
  • Click “Log in with Amplify.”
  • Enter the username and password provided on your Digital Access Flyer.

Navigation Tips

Below you will find helpful tips for navigating Amplify Desmos Math California. We recommend reading these pages alongside the program’s print materials and digital experience to gain a deeper understanding of the program. 

Click the links below to read about navigating program features including:

Built for California

The Amplify Desmos Math California program is designed around the vision articulated in the California Mathematics Framework to enable all California students to become powerful users of mathematics. Our program incorporates the latest research in student learning, meaning that we:

  • Focus on the Big Ideas: Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. Big Ideas, like standards, are not considered in isolation. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons.
  • Center on open and engaging tasks: Amplify Desmos Math California is grounded in engaging tasks meant to address students’ often-asked question: “Why am I learning this?”  Students are invited into learning with low-floor, high-ceiling tasks that provide an entry point for all. Open tasks in Amplify Desmos Math California provide the space for students to try on multiple strategies and represent their thinking in different ways, and allow student explanation and discussion to serve as the center of the classroom. All lessons offer both print and digital representations of lessons.
  • Provide enhanced digital experiences: Amplify Desmos Math California includes digitally-enhanced lesson activities, incorporating interactive digital tools alongside print materials. These purposefully-placed resources allow students to visualize mathematical concepts, receive actionable feedback while practicing, encounter personalized learning support from an onscreen tutor, and engage in discussions about their thinking and approaches.
  • Treat core instruction and differentiation as integral partners: The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to lesson content and offer students the individualized support as they dive into the mathematics.

Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards

Standards Maps

The links below provide the Standards Maps for Amplify Desmos Math California for each grade level.

Evaluation Criteria Map

Linked here is the Evaluation Criteria Map for grades K–8. Please note that you will need to be logged into the digital platform to access the links in the Evaluation Criteria Map.

Standards for Mathematical Practice

The links below provide the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the Standards for Mathematical Practice at each grade level.

Drivers of Investigation and Content Connections

Amplify Desmos Math California incorporates the Drivers of Investigation (DIs) and Content Connection (CCs) throughout the program. Throughout the year, students engage with open and authentic tasks of varying durations — from lesson activities to unit-level Explore lessons and longer course-level Investigations. Every lesson and investigation opportunity is grounded around the why, how, and what of the learning experience, and helps teachers bring mathematical concepts to life. 

A three-column chart details: Drivers of Investigation, Standards for Mathematical Practice, and Content Connections, each with their respective codes and brief descriptions.

California English Language Development Standards

The links below provide the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the California English Language Development Standards at each grade level.

California Environmental Principles and Concepts

Select lessons, performance tasks, and investigations across grade levels in Amplify Desmos Math California are aligned to one or more of the California Environmental Principles and Concepts. Click the links below to view how the California Environmental Principles and Concepts are represented in each grade level.

Category 2: Program Organization

Amplify Desmos Math California thoughtfully combines conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application. Each lesson is designed to tell a story by posing problems that invite a variety of approaches before guiding students to synthesize their understanding of the learning goals.

Big Ideas

Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons. Please refer to Keeping the Big Ideas at the Center (linked below) for specific lesson designs and alignment with the Big Ideas for each grade level.

Program Structure

Amplify Desmos Math California combines the best of problem-based lessons, intervention, personalized practice, and assessments into a coherent and engaging experience for both students and teachers.

A diagram showing three stages: Core instruction, Integrated personalized learning, and Embedded intervention, under Screening and progress monitoring with daily tiered support.

Lessons and units in Amplify Desmos Math California are designed around a Proficiency Progression, a model that steps out problem-based learning by systematically building students’ curiosity into lasting grade-level understanding.

Five steps for learning: 1. Activate prior knowledge, 2. Collaborate, 3. Refine ideas, 4. Guide to understanding, 5. Practice and extend for lasting understanding.

In the Proficiency Progression, lessons begin by activating students’ natural curiosity and offering opportunities to generate new ideas through collaboration. Teachers are then able to refine ideas through intentional facilitation and guide students to grade-level understanding, while students retain the ability to use different strategies and methods to show their comprehension of the content. Students are provided ample opportunities to develop lasting understanding.

Scope and Sequence

Below you can view the scope and sequence for each grade level. 

A chart displaying seven kindergarten math units with themes, number of instructional days, and assessment days, totaling 136 suggested instructional days.
Grade 1 instructional units overview showing 7 units on math topics, total suggested days is 153, with each unit listing instructional and assessment days.
Grade 2 math curriculum map showing 8 units with topics, number of instructional and assessment days, and total days; suggested instructional days: 156.
Seven instructional units are shown, each with a title, icon, number of instructional and assessment days, and total days; a note suggests 150 instructional days in total.
A Grade 4 math curriculum overview showing seven units with titles, number of instructional days, and assessment days; the suggested total instructional days is 152.
A curriculum map displays seven math units with icons, titles, instructional days, and assessment days, totaling 149 suggested instructional days.
A chart showing Grade 6 math units, each with instructional days, assessment days, and optional days. Total suggested instructional days is 142, plus 19 optional days.
Overview of Grade 7 math curriculum units, showing unit titles, number of instructional, assessment, and optional days for each, with a total of 125 instructional days plus 22 optional days.
Eight illustrated cards display Grade 8 math units, each with the unit title, topics covered, number of instructional and assessment days, and a total of 131 suggested instructional days.
Curriculum chart showing eight units split into two volumes, with topics, instructional days, assessment days, and optional days listed for each unit over an accelerated 6th-grade year.
A chart displays the breakdown of Accelerated 7 math units, indicating topics, number of instructional days, assessment days, and optional days for each of the nine units across two volumes.

Lesson Design and Structure

A four-part diagram shows: Warm-Up, Activities with a graph of student ideas to grade-level understanding, Synthesis with notes, and Practice and differentiation with students building a structure.

Amplify Desmos Math California is designed with a structured approach to problem-based learning that systematically builds on students’ curiosity and allows students to grapple with the Big Ideas of the California Framework. Every lesson activity is organized into a Launch, Monitor, Connect format.

  • Launch: The launch is a short, whole-class conversation that creates a need or excitement, provides clarity, or helps students connect their prior knowledge or personal experience, which ensures that everyone has access to the upcoming work.  
  • Monitor: As students work individually, in pairs, or in groups, teachers explore student thinking, ask questions, and provide support to help move the conversations closer to the intended math learning goal. 
  • Connect: Teachers connect students’ ideas to the key learning goals of the lesson, facilitating class discussions that help synthesize and solidify the Big Ideas 

Each lesson within Amplify Desmos Math California follows the same structure. 

  • Warm-Up: Every Amplify Desmos Math California lesson begins with a whole class Warm-Up. Warm-Ups are an invitational Instructional Routine intended to provide a social moment at the start of the lesson in which every student has an opportunity to contribute. Warm-Ups may build fluency or highlight a strategy that may be helpful in the current lesson or act as an invitation into the math of the lesson.
  • Lesson Activities: Each lesson includes one or two activities. These activities are the heart of each lesson. Students notice, wonder, explore, calculate, predict, measure, explain their thinking, use math to settle disputes, create challenges for their classmates, and more. Guidance is provided to help teachers launch, monitor, and connect student thinking over the course of the activity.
  • Synthesis and Show What You Know: The Synthesis is an opportunity for the teacher and students to pull all the learning of the lesson together into a lesson takeaway. Students engage in a facilitated discussion to consolidate and refine their ideas about the learning goals, and the teacher synthesizes students’ learning. Show What You Know is a daily assessment opportunity for students to show what they know about the learning goals and what they are still learning.
  • Centers (K–5): Centers are hands-on activities for students in grades K–5 to play collaboratively to strengthen their understanding of key skills and concepts. In grades K–1, students have Daily Center Time built into every lesson. 
  • Practice and Differentiation: Daily practice problems for the day’s lesson are included both online and in the print Student Edition, including fluency, test practice, and spiral review.

Kindergarten–Grade 1

A lesson plan timeline showing phases: Warm-Up (5–10 min, whole class), Lesson Activities (25–30 min), Synthesis (10 min), Centers (15 min), and Practice (time varies).

Grades 2–5

A horizontal flowchart shows a classroom lesson sequence: Warm-Up (5–10 min), Lesson Activities (35 min), Synthesis (10 min), and Practice (time varies); groupings vary.

Grades 6–8

A horizontal timeline shows four lesson segments: Warm-Up (5 min), Lesson Activities (30 min), Synthesis (10 min), and Practice (time varies).

Routines

Amplify Desmos Math California features a variety of lesson routines. Instructional routines and Math Language Routines (MLRs) are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition. Both are called out at point-of-use within the Teacher Edition and Teacher Presentation Screens. Below are the types of routines used throughout the Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum:

  • MLR1: Stronger and Clearer Each Time
  • MLR2: Collect and Display
  • MLR3: Critique, Correct, Clarify
  • MLR5: Co-Craft Questions
  • MLR6: Three Reads
  • MLR7: Compare and Connect
  • MLR 8: Discussion Supports
  • Decide and Defend
  • Notice and Wonder
  • Number Talk
  • Tell a Story
  • Think-Pair-Share
  • Which One Doesn’t Belong?

Category 3: Assessments

A variety of performance data in Amplify Desmos Math California provides evidence of student learning, while helping students bolster their skills and understanding.

Unit-Level Assessment

Amplify Desmos Math California has embedded unit assessments that offer key insights into students’ conceptual understanding of math. These assessments provide regular, actionable information about how students are thinking about and processing math, with both auto-scoring and in-depth rubrics that help teachers anticipate and respond to students’ learning needs.

  • Pre-Unit Check: Each unit in grades 2–8 begins with a formative assessment designed to identify the student skills that will be particularly relevant to the upcoming unit. This check is agnostic to the standards covered in the following unit and serves not as a deficit-based acknowledgment of what students do not know, but rather as an affirmation of the knowledge and skills with which students come in.
  • End-of-Unit Assessment: Students engage with rigorous grade-level mathematics through a variety of formats and tasks in the summative End-of-Unit Assessment. A combination of auto-scored (when completed digitally) and rubric-scored items provides deep insights into student thinking. All Amplify Desmos Math California End-of-Unit Assessments include two forms.
  • Sub-Unit Quizzes: Sub-Unit Quizzes are formative assessments embedded regularly in Grades Kindergarten through Algebra 1. In these checks, students are assessed on a subset of conceptual understandings from the unit, with rubrics that help illuminate students’ current understanding and provide guidance for responding to student thinking.
  • Sub-Unit Checklists: These checklists enable teachers to observe key skills and concepts that cannot be assessed on a pencil-and-paper assessment in Kindergarten–Grade 1. The checklists outline the supports students need to achieve mathematical growth and success.
  • Performance Tasks: At the end of each unit in grades 3–8, there is a summative assessment performance task provided to evaluate students’ proficiency with the concepts and skills addressed in the unit. 

Lesson-Level Assessments

Amplify Desmos Math California lessons include daily moments of assessment to provide valuable evidence of learning for both the teacher and student. Beyond formative, summative, and benchmark assessments, students also have opportunities for self-reflection with Watch Your Knowledge Grow. Students take ownership of their learning by reflecting and tracking their progress before and after each unit.

  • Show What You Know: Each lesson has a daily formative assessment focused on one of the key concepts in the lesson. Show What You Know moments are carefully designed to minimize completion time for students while maximizing daily teacher insights to attend to student needs during the following class. 
  • Responsive Feedback™: Teachers have the ability to see and provide in-the-moment feedback as students progress through a digital lesson. Responsive Feedback motivates students and engages them in the learning process.

Diagnostic Assessment

Every grade level features an asset-based diagnostic assessment designed to be administered at the beginning of the year.  Delivered digitally and to the whole class, our diagnostic assessment is uniquely designed to reveal underlying math thinking and identify what students know about grade-level math. With data beyond just right and wrong, teachers have the type of deeper level of insights need to take the right next step.

CAASPP-Aligned Assessment Preparation

Amplify Desmos Math is designed to support students’ mathematical development through problem-based learning, differentiation, and embedded assessments. The program’s emphasis on conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application aligns with the mathematical practices and content standards assessed by the CAASPP.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a CAASPP-aligned Item Bank. This standards-aligned bank of questions allows teachers to filter and search by grade and standard to find items. Once assigned on the digital platform, students will experience CAASPP-like practice with the online digital tools.

Data and Reporting

Amplify Desmos Math California provides teachers and administrators with unified reporting and insights so that educators have visibility into what students know about grade-level math—and can plan instruction accordingly for the whole class, small groups, and individual students. Reporting functionality integrates unit assessments, lesson assessments, diagnostic data, and progress monitoring for a comprehensive look at student learning. Program reports show proficiency and growth by domain, cluster, standard, and priority concept using performance data from unit assessments, then highlight areas of potential student need to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support.

Administrator reporting provides a complete picture of student, class, and district performance, allowing administrators to implement instructional and intervention plans.

Category 4: Access and Equity

The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Our lessons are developed using the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to proactively ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.

Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to the day’s content and offer students the individualized supports they need to be successful.

Each lesson and unit contains guidance for teachers on how to identify students who may need support, students who need to keep strengthening their understanding, and students who may be ready to stretch their learning. In addition, teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students.

Universal Design for Learning

Each lesson in the program incorporates opportunities for engagement, representation, action, and expression based on the guidelines of Universal Design for Learning (UDL).

  • Multiple Means of Engagement: Students engage in both print and digital learning, and are regularly participating in discussions and hands-on activities. Students are invited to build their own challenge for other students to solve, which provides opportunities for choice and
    autonomy, as well as joy and play.
  • Multiple Means of Representation: Students are encouraged to demonstrate their learning using mathematical representations, both print and digital, and regularly engage with their peers in analyzing multiple possible solutions. Classes engage in open-ended discussions about what individual students notice and wonder about mathematical concepts.
  • Multiple Means of Action and Expression: Learners differ in how they navigate learning environments and express what they know. Students can communicate their ideas in multiple ways, including in print, sketching, uploading photos, or recording an audio response.

Accessibility

Lesson facilitation supports

Every lesson includes at least one specific suggestion the teacher can use to increase access to the lesson without reducing the mathematical demand of the tasks. These suggestions address the following areas:

  • Visual-spatial processing
  • Conceptual processing
  • Executive functioning
  • Memory and attention
  • Fine motor skills

Accessibility tools

Students have the ability to control accessibility tools so that each learning experience is customized to their individual needs. In many instances, these tools can be turned on or off at any point of instruction.

  • Text to speech: Reads text instructions to students in multiple languages
  • Enlarged font: Increases the size of all text on screen
  • Braille mode: Includes narration of digital interactions
  • Language selection: Toggles between languages

Differentiation: In-Lesson Teacher Moves

Within every lesson activity, teachers can use the suggestions in the Differentiation Teacher Moves table to provide in-the-moment instructional support while students are engaged in the work of the lesson. This table can help teachers anticipate the ways students may approach the activity, and provides prompts that they can use during the lesson to Support, Strengthen, and Stretch individual students in their thinking. Teachers are provided with clear student actions and understanding to look for, each matched with immediately usable suggestions for how to respond to the student thinking illustrated in each row of the table. In addition to using these suggestions in the moment as teachers monitor student work, teachers can review the Differentiation table in advance to help them anticipate how students are likely to approach the activity.

A table showing differentiation teacher moves with examples of representing groups in different ways, support prompts, and a stretch question about patterns with more teams.

Differentiation: Beyond the Lesson

Teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students needing support, strengthening, and stretching after each lesson. Support, Strengthen, and Stretch resources include:

  • Mini-Lessons: 15-minute, small-group direct instruction lessons targeted to a specific concept or skill
  • Item Banks: Space for teachers to create practice and assessments by using filters and searching for standards, summative-style items, and more
  • Fluency Practice: Adaptive, personalized practice built out for basic operations and more
  • Centers (K–5): Lesson-embedded routines and practice for students that are vertically aligned across grade levels
  • Extensions: Lesson-embedded Teacher Moves including possible stretch questions and activities for students
  • Lesson Practice: Additional practice problems support every lesson
  • Math Adventures: Strategy-based math games where students engage with math concepts and practice skills in a fun digital environment
  • Lesson Summary Support: Support for students and caregivers that provides efficient explanation of the learning goal with clear examples

Math Identity and Community

The Math Identity and Community feature supports teachers in helping students build confidence in their own mathematical thinking, develop skills to work with and learn from others when doing math, and learn how math is an interwoven part of their broader community. The embedded prompts throughout the lessons are designed to highlight what it means to be good at math, the value of sharing ideas, and the power of flexible and creating thinking. Here are some examples of the Math Identity and Community supports embedded in each lesson:

  • I can be all of me in math class. You will work with partners every day in math class. What do you want your partners to know about you? 
  • We are a math community. What does good listening look like and sound like in a math community? 
  • I am a doer of math. What math strengths did you use today?

Unit Stories

Every unit in grades K–5 contains a Unit Story. These Unit Stories are brief fiction stories read aloud by the teacher at the beginning of each unit that connect to the math of the unit and introduce characters that students will get to know as they engage in the unit. Teachers read the story aloud from their Teacher Edition while projecting illustrations for students from the story, found in the Teacher Presentation Screens for the story. Across the unit, the Unit Story context and characters are used at appropriate points to inspire and engage students in the math as well as in reflections about their math identity and community.

Math Language Development

Every lesson in Amplify Desmos Math California includes opportunities for all students to develop mathematical language as they experience the content. Amplify Desmos Math California purposefully progresses language development from lesson to lesson and across units by supporting students in making their arguments and explanations stronger, clearer, and more precise. This systematic approach to the development of math language can be broken down into the following four categories of support:

  • Vocabulary: Units and lessons start by surfacing students’ language for new concepts, then building connections between their language and the new vocabulary for that unit. This honors the language assets that students bring into their learning.
  • Language goals: Language goals attend to the mathematics students are learning, and are written through the lens of one or more of four language modalities: reading, writing, speaking, and listening.
  • Math Language Routines: Math Language Routines are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition.
  • Multilingual/English learner supports: Supports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentional points within each lesson. These specific, targeted suggestions support ML/ELs with modifications that increase access to a task, or through development of contextual or mathematical language (both of which can be supportive of all learners). 

Multilingual and English Learner Supports

Amplify partnered with the English Learner Success Forum (ELSF), a national nonprofit organization that advocates for high-quality instructional materials that are inclusive of multilingual learners. ELSF reviewed Amplify Desmos Math California, and provided directional guidance and feedback to ensure that the program reflects their research-based instructional strategies for multilingual/English learners.

Our Math Language Development Resources book contains lesson-specific strategies and activities for all levels of English Learners (i.e., Emerging, Expanding, Bridging). With support for every lesson, teachers are empowered to help all students, regardless of their language skills, to participate fully, grasp the material, and excel in their mathematical journey.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a digital glossary for languages other than Spanish. Translations will be provided for up to nine languages.

Amplify Desmos Math California will include Spanish student-facing materials beginning in the 2026–27 school year.

Category 5: Instructional Planning and Support

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a variety of embedded instructional supports to empower teachers to lead effectively and gain actionable insights into student growth and progress. Teachers are equipped with a comprehensive set of resources designed to fulfill the requirements of Category 5.

Within the Teacher Edition front matter:

  • Scope and sequence
  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Unit and Sub-Unit Overview:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Math that Matters Most
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Lesson:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

At the course level (within the Teacher Edition front matter):

  • Navigating the Program (both print and digital)
  • Facilitating Lesson Activities with Launch, Monitor and Connect
  • Overview of the Digital Facilitation Tools

At the lesson level:

  • Suggestions for timing
  • What materials to prep
  • How to organize and group students 
  • Key lesson takeaways with the Synthesis
  • Recommendations for Differentiation
  • Strategies for intervention and extensions (in the Intervention, Extensions, and Investigation Resources book)

At the activity level:

  • Differentiation recommendations
  • Accessibility tips
  • ML / EL tips
  • Teacher look-fors
  • Recommended Teacher Moves
  • Prompts for guiding student thinking 
  • Sample student responses

A variety of language development supports are provided within the Student and Teacher Editions and Math Language Development Resources book. 

At the lesson level:

  • Diagrams and visuals
  • Sentence frames and word banks
  • Graphic organizers, including Frayer models
  • Vocabulary routines
  • Embedded language supports aligned to the CA ELDs
  • Lesson-specific strategies for Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging

At the unit level: 

  • Words With Multiple Meanings
  • Contextual vocabulary

At the course level:

  • English/Spanish cognates
  • Multilingual Glossary 
  • Additional Practice Resources book
  • Assessment Resources book 
  • Assess and Respond guidance paired with each assessment opportunity
  • Show-What-You-Know activities
  • Answer keys and rubrics 
  • Performance tasks

Winter Wrap-Up 03: Ideas to build math fluency

Promotional graphic for "Math Teacher Lounge" episode featuring Valerie Henry, Ed.D., on ideas to build math fluency, with a photo of Valerie Henry in the bottom right corner.

Join us for the third episode in our Winter Wrap-Up! In this episode from season 3 of Math Teacher Lounge: The Podcast, we sit down with Dr. Valerie Henry to talk about math fluency and what that means for students. Listen as we dig into the research, hear Val’s three-part definition of fluency, and explore her five principles for developing it.

Explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page

Download Transcript

Dan Meyer (00:03)

Hey folks. Welcome back. This is Math Teacher Lounge, and I am one of your hosts, Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:07):

And I’m your other host, Bethany Lockhart Johnson. Hi, Dan.

Dan Meyer (00:11):

Hey, great to see you. We have a big one this week to chat about and some fantastic guests. We are chatting about fluency, which is the sort of word and concept that I feel like people have very, very non-neutral associations with it. A lot of them are very negative, for a lot of people.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:26):

I saw you frown a little. What’s up with that, Dan? You kind of, like, shrank.

Dan Meyer (00:30):

I have strong feelings about it. You know, there’s lots of ways that people go about helping people become fluent in mathematics. And a lot of them are harmful for students, and ineffective. And it got me thinking about fluency as it exists outside of the world of mathematics, where we have a lot of very clear images of it. We’re getting fluent in things all the time. Like, as humans. Human development is the story of fluency. And I just was wondering….Bethany, would you describe yourself as fluent at something outside of the world of mathematics? What is that? How’d you get fluent at it? What was the process?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:05):

Hmm, I think I’m a pretty fluent reader. I read all the time. I’m a happier person if I’ve read that day. I once saw this poster in a classroom; it said “10 Ways to Become a Better Reader: Read, Read, Read, Read, Read…you know, 10 times. Get it? Reading? You get better at reading by reading! So I would say reading. And it’s been kind of cool—I have a one-year-old who, it’s been really exciting slash overwhelmingly anxiety-producing to see him get very fluent with walking slash running, ’cause he’s getting faster every day. And it’s kind of fun. When I think of what’s something somebody’s trying to get fluent with…walking! He’s trying to be more fluid. He’s practicing transitions. He doesn’t wanna hold my hand while he traverses rocky terrain. He’s getting better at it. He’s practicing. What about you? What’s something…?

Dan Meyer (02:08):

I think about driving a lot. I’m a very fluent driver and I think a lot about when I was first a driver, you know? And how l have my hands on 10 and 2, vice grip, and do not talk to me; do not ask me anything; don’t ask me my NAME. I need to focus so hard. And then a year later, you know, I’m driving with one hand, smash the turn signal, take a sip off of whatever, change the CD. And then it’s no big deal.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:38):

Wait, did you pass the first time? Your test?

Dan Meyer (02:40):

Yeah, I don’t like to brag about it. <laugh> But I do all the time. <laugh> But I got a hundred on my driving test. I don’t care who knows it. And I hope it’s everybody. But I guess all of this is just to say there are areas of life where fluency feels natural, with the case of walking. There’s areas of life where fluency feels motivating, with like driving—I wanna be able to switch the CD out or whatever. And there’s areas where fluency feels terrifying and hard to come by, like mathematics, sometimes. So we have a set of guests here. Our first guest will help us figure out what do we mean by fluency? And what’s the research say about what fluency is and how students develop it in mathematics? And then our other guests will help us think about what it looks like in practice in the classroom. What are some novel, new ways to work on fluency? So first up we have Val Henry, Dr. Val Henry.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:32):

So we knew we needed help with the fluency definition, because when we think about it, it’s kind of big, right? And we wanted to look at what research about fluency really says. So we called on Valerie Henry. Val is a nationally board-certified teacher, taught middle school for 17 years, and since 2002 has worked with undergraduates graduates, credential candidates as a lecturer at the University of California, Irvine, one of my alma maters. So after doing her dissertation on addition and subtraction fluency in first grade, Val created a project to study ways to build addition and subtraction and multiplication and division fluency while also developing number sense in algebraic thinking. And the pilot grew and grew over the last 18 years into a powerful daily mini-lesson approach to facts fluency called FactsWise. And when we thought of fluency, the first person I thought of was Val. Welcome, Val Henry, to the Lounge! I’m so excited to have you here. Welcome.

Valerie Henry (04:36):

Thanks, Bethany. And thanks to you, Dan. It’s great to be here today.

Dan Meyer (04:41):

Great to have you; help yourself to whatever you find in the fridge. The names that people write down on those things in the bags are just recommendations. It’s potluck-style here. I’m curious, Val, if you’re, like, on an airplane, someone asks you what you do, and you say you study fluency…what is the layperson’s definition of what does it mean to be fluent in mathematics? And if you can give a brief tour through what the research says about what works and what doesn’t that would really help us orient our conversation here.

Valerie Henry (05:12):

The first thing I have to do when I talk to somebody on a plane is define the idea of fluency. And I often use an example of tying your shoelaces. Because that works with first graders as well as adults. This idea that when we first start trying to put our shoes on and get those shoelaces tied, somebody tries to, first of all, just do it for us. But then of course maybe tries to teach us the bunny-ears approach. And we struggle and struggle as little kids and eventually either the bunny-ears approach or something else starts to work for us. But we still have to pay attention to it. We have to think hard and it’s not easy. And then over time we get to the point where we basically don’t even think about it. When I tie my shoes in the morning. I’m not thinking about right-over-left and left-over-right and all of those things. I just do it. And so that’s a good, easy example of becoming fluent with something. I think what we’re talking about today though, is the basics, the adding and subtracting that we hope kids are going to have mastered maybe by second grade, and the multiplication and division facts that we wanna maybe have mastered by third, maybe fourth grade. So now what does that mean to become fluent with those basics? I have a three-part definition that seems to match up really nicely with the common core approach to fluency. Which is, first of all, we want the answers to be correct. And then second, we want the answers to be easy to know. And so what does that mean? Well, to me, it means without needing to count,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:12):

You mean without having to kind of muscle through it? Or say more about you mean.

Valerie Henry (07:16):

Well, I guess what I mean is that when you watch a young child try and solve something even as simple as two plus three, they might put up two fingers and then go 3, 4, 5 with three more fingers winding up on their hand, one or the other of their hands. While they’re doing that, they don’t really have a sense of whether even their answer is right or not, quite often. Especially when you get to the larger adding and subtracting problems, you can see a lot of errors happening as they’re trying to count. And it’s taking up cognitive energy to do that counting process, especially as you get to the larger quantities. So my definition of fluency now is “getting it right without needing to do that hard work like counting.” Now, some people might say, well, we just want them to have ’em memorized. But in my research, I’ve learned that a lot of very fluid adults don’t always have every fact memorized. In fact, if you ask a room full of adults, what’s seven plus nine, you might learn that they can all get it correct quickly, quickly…but they don’t all have it memorized. And so when you ask them, “How did you get that?” Many of them will say, “Well, I just gave one from the 7 to the 9 and I know that 10 plus 6 is 16.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:53):

That’s such an important distinction. My brain literally just did that actually!

Valerie Henry (08:58):

<laugh> Right? <laugh> But you’re fluid with it, because it doesn’t take you much cognitive energy at all.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:05):

Right.

Valerie Henry (09:07):

So now we have “correct without needing to put that cognitive energy,” which usually means that you’re counting. And then the third thing is “relatively quickly,” so that you’re not spending 15 seconds trying to figure it out. Even that part-whole strategy approach can be done really quickly, almost instantaneously. Or it can take a long time. So if a student can get the answer correct within, you know, three or four seconds— is I’m pretty generous—I figure that they’re pretty darn fluent with that fact. So that’s my three-part definition of these basics, fluency.

Dan Meyer (09:55):

I love the distinction between getting it correct and getting it quick. It’s possible to be quick with wrong answers. It’s possible to be like, “Those are separate components there.” And I echo Bethany’s appreciation for this third option in between knowing it instantaneously through memorization and muscling through it. But there’s like a continuum there of how much energy it took you to come up with it that all feels extremely helpful.

Valerie Henry (10:21):

And you know, one of the things that I’ve noticed is that when kids are pressured to come up with those instantaneous answers, they often default to guessing and get it wrong.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:30):

Mm, yeah.

Valerie Henry (10:30):

So that’s one of the things that I’ve learned is that as we’re trying to help students develop fluency, it’s important to start with building their conceptual understanding of what it means to do, you know, 3 times 9 and what the correct answer is, maybe using manipulatives or representations of some sort. Not skip-counting! I really have found that skip-counting just perpetuates itself in many students’ minds and that they never stop skip-counting, which means they’re putting in not very much mental energy if it’s 2 times 3 but a ton of mental energy if it’s 7 times 8. Because frankly, it’s really hard to skip count by sevens. And by eights.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:18):

I can get to 14 and then I’m like, wait, wait, what was next? Right? No, no, no…21! What do you feel are some misconceptions that maybe teachers, maybe parents have about fluency in math?

Valerie Henry (11:30):

I think maybe one of the first ones is that if students count or skip-count, their answers repetitively over and over and over and over, that they’re bound to memorize them. And the study that I did back in 2004, I actually had a school that had decided that they were going to do time tests with their students every day, all year. And that undoubtedly by the end of the year, those students would be fluent.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:06):

And to clarify by time test, you mean like, sit down, pencil, paper, ready, go, worksheet kind of thing.

Valerie Henry (12:15):

Yes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:16):

Some of us might remember quite vividly.

Valerie Henry (12:18):

<laugh> Very vividly. And you know, you have to get it done within a certain amount of time. So they made it fun for the students. Apparently the students enjoyed it. I was a little leery about that, but in the end, when I went and checked on the students and I did one-on-one assessments with half of the students in every class that were randomly selected so that I could get a sense of where they were with their fluency—and these were first graders—they basically had nothing memorized. They were simply counting as fast as they possibly could. And, you know, mostly getting the right answers. But they had not memorized. So that’s one of the myths, I think, is that repetitive practice of counting gets you to memorization.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:10):

If I put it in front of you enough times, you’ll become fluent.

Valerie Henry (13:14):

Right, right. Now these students didn’t really get any instruction, any help learning these. They just simply tested over and over and over. So that’s another thing that I think is a misconception. It’s that if we test students, but don’t really teach them fluency, then they’re going to become fluent. If we just test them every Friday or that kind of thing. And that they’ll learn them at home. But really what that means is a few lucky kids who have parents who have the time and the energy and the background to know how to help will take that job on at home. Not that many students are really that fortunate.

Dan Meyer (14:01):

It’s almost like the traditional approach, or the approach you’re describing, confuses process and product. It says, “Well, the product is that eventually fluent students will be able to do something like this, see these problems and answer them, answer them quickly,” and says, “Well, that must be the process then as well; let’s give them that products a whole lot.” But as I hear you describe fluency with bunny ears on shoelaces, there’s these images and approaches and techniques that require a very active teacher presence to support the development of it. That’s just kind of interesting to me.

Valerie Henry (14:35):

My initial project, the pilot project that I tried, was to simply ask teachers to follow five key principles. And the first one was to do something in the classroom every day for—I told them, even if you’ve only got five or 10 minutes, work on fluency for five or 10 minutes a day, and let’s see what happens. So that was one key element was just to teach it and to give students opportunities to get what the research calls for when you’re trying to memorize, which is actually immediate feedback. When I talk about immediate feedback with my student teachers, I say, “I’m talking about within one or two seconds of trying a problem, and then sort of immediately knowing, getting feedback of whether you got the answer right or not so that your brain can kind of gain that confidence. ‘Oh, not only did I come up with an answer, but somebody’s telling me it’s the correct answer.’”

Dan Meyer (15:38):

There’s a lot of apps now in the digital world that offer students questions about arithmetic or other kinds of mathematical concepts and give immediate feedback of a sort: the feedback of “You’re right; you’re wrong” sort. Is that effective fluency development, in your view?

Valerie Henry (15:57):

I haven’t heard and I haven’t seen them being super-effective. The ways I think about this are “Immediate feedback isn’t the only thing we need.” Probably one of the biggest things that we need is for students to develop strategies. And this is one of the other things I’ve learned from international research, from countries that do have students who become very fluent very early, is that they don’t shoot straight for memorization, but they go through this process of taking students from doing some counting and then quickly moving them to trying to use logic. So, “Hey, you really are confident that 2 + 2 is 4; so now let’s use that to think about 2 + 3.” Actually, as an algebra teacher, I would much rather have students that have a combination of memorization and these strategies, than students who’ve only memorized. Isn’t that interesting that my most successful algebra students were good strategy thinkers. Not just good memorizers.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (17:09):

So you mentioned there were five that kind of helped root this idea in like, “What can teachers do? What is the best thing that teachers can do to support with fact fluency?” So, everyday was key.

Valerie Henry (17:22):

Then the next principle that I really focus on is switching immediately to the connected subtractions so that students—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (17:33):

Not waiting until you’ve gotten all the way through addition. But making “Ooh!”

Valerie Henry (17:38):

Totally. And I didn’t do that the first year. And when we looked at the results of the assessments at the end of the year, we realized that our students were so much weaker in subtraction than addition. So the following pilot year, we tried this other approach of doing subtraction right after the students had developed some fluency with that small chunk of addition. And we got such better subtraction results.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (18:11):

What are the other principles?

Valerie Henry (18:13):

The biggest one is to use these strategies. So the strategies makes the third. And then the fourth I would say is to go from concrete to representational to abstract.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (18:27):

Don’t put away those manipulatives. Don’t put away those tools.

Valerie Henry (18:31):

Oh, so important to come back to them for multiplication and division. And my fifth principle is to wait on assessment. To use it as true assessment, but not race to start testing before students have had a chance to go through this three-phase process. Which is conceptual understanding with manipulatives; building strategies, usually with representations; and then working on building some speed until it’s just that natural fluency.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:07):

I wanna say thank you so much for offering your really learned perspective, because you have not only done the research, but seen it in action and seen how shifting our notions of fluency and what fluency can be and what a powerful foundation it can be for all mathematicians. Really, that shift is so powerful. And I appreciate you sharing it with our listeners and with us. So we’re so excited that we got to talk with you today, Val—

Dan Meyer (19:35):

Thank you, Dr. Henry.

Valerie Henry (19:37):

You’re welcome!

Dan Meyer (19:41):

With us now we have Graham Fletcher and Tracy Zager, a couple of people who understand fluency at a very deep and classroom level. I wanna introduce them and get their perspective on what we’re trying to solve here with fluency. So Graham Fletcher has served in education in a lot of different roles: as a classroom teacher, math coach, math specialist, and he’s continually seeking new and innovative ways to support students and teachers in their development of conceptual understanding in elementary math. He’s the author, along with Tracy, of Building Fact Fluency, a fluency kit we’ll talk about, and openly shares so much of his wisdom and resources at gfletchy.com. Tracy Johnson Zager is a district math coach who loves to get teachers hooked on listening to kids’ mathematical ideas. She is a co-author of this toolkit, Building Fact Fluency, and the author of Becoming the Math Teacher You Wish You’d Had: Ideas and Strategies from Vibrant Classrooms. Tracy also edits professional books for teachers at Stenhouse Publishers, including, yours truly. Thank you for all that insight, Tracy, and support on the book.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (20:49):

Dan and I were talking at the beginning of the episode about things we feel like, “Hey, I’m fluent in that. I’m fluent in that.”

Dan Meyer (20:55):

Just very curious: What’s something you would like to get fluent in outside of the world of mathematics, let’s say?

Tracy Zager (21:00):

I’ll say understanding the teenage brain, as the parent of a 13-year-old and 15-year-old. That’s the main thing I’m working on becoming fluent in!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:10):

Ooh!

Dan Meyer (21:13):

A language fluency, perhaps. All right, Graham. How about you?

Graham Fletcher (21:16):

For me typing, it’s always been an Achilles heel of mine. So voice-to-text has been my friend. But it’s also been my nemesis in much of my texting here and working virtually over the last couple years. So yeah, typing.

Dan Meyer (21:33):

Do you folks have some way of helping us understand the difference in how fluency is handled by instructors and by learners?

Tracy Zager (21:40):

I would say that the lay meaning of fluency is definitely a little different than what we mean in the math education realm. When we’re talking about math fact fluency, which is just one type of fluency. So you gotta think about procedural fluency and computational fluency; there are lots of types of fluency in math. And Graham and I had the luxury of really focusing in specifically on math fact fluency. We’re looking at kind of a subset of the procedural fluency. So the words you hear in all the citations are accurate, efficient, and flexible. There’s this combination of kids get the right answer in a reasonable amount of time and with a reasonable amount of work and they can match their strategy or their approach to the situation. That’s where that flexibility comes in. And there’s like lots more I wanna say about that about sort of…I think one issue that comes up around fluency is that people are in a little bit of a rush. So they tend to think of the fluency as this automaticity or recall of known facts without having to think about it. And that is part of the end goal, but that’s not the journey to fluency. So this is one of the things that Graham and I thought about a lot was the path to fluency. The goal here it’s that student in middle school who’s learning something new doesn’t have to expend any effort to gather that fact. And they might do it because they’ve done it so many different ways that they’ve got it, and now they just know it, or they might be like my friend who’s a mathematician who still, if you say, “Six times 8,” she thinks in her head, “Twelve, 24, 48…” and she does this double-double-double associative property strategy. And it’s so efficient, you would never know. And that’s totally great. That’s fine. That’s not slowing her down. That’s not providing a drag in the middle of a more complex problem or new learning. So we’re really focused on having elementary school students be able to enter the middle and high school standards without having that pull out of the new thinking.

Graham Fletcher (23:53):

And as I think about that, I think about how so many students will memorize their facts, but then they haven’t memorized them with understanding. So that when they move into middle school and they move into high school, it’s almost like new knowledge and new understanding that’s applied from a stand-alone skill.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:10):

So something that felt really unique to me, Graham, as I was diving into the toolkit, is your use of images, Tracy, Graham, is the way that you use images to help students notice and wonder to start making sense of these quantities and the decomposition of numbers using images. Can you talk a little bit about how images played a part in the way that you think about this building a fact fluency?

Graham Fletcher (24:41):

What I realized is so many times when we approach math with just naked numbers with so many of our elementary students, the numbers aren’t visible. The quantities. They can’t see them; they can’t move them. They’re just those squiggly figures that we were talking about earlier on. So how is it that we make the quantities visible, to where students feel as if they can grab an apple and move it around? Because a lot of times we start with the naked numbers and then if kids don’t get the naked numbers, then we kind of backfill it. But what would happen if we start with the images? And then from there, these rich, flourishing mathematical conversations develop from the images. And I think that was the premise and the goal of the toolkit.

Tracy Zager (25:22):

When you look at how fact fluency has traditionally been taught, it’s all naked numbers. And sometimes we wrote ’em sideways. Like, that’s it. That was our variety of task type. Right? Sometimes it’s vertical; sometimes it’s horizontal. And that was it. And I’ve just known way too many kids who couldn’t find a hook to hang their hat on with that. It didn’t connect to anything. And so part of why I knew Graham was the perfect person for this project was his strength in multimedia photography, art, video. And so we started from this idea of contexts that for each lesson string in the toolkit, there’s some kind of context. An everyday object, arranged in some kind of a way that reveals mathematical structure and invites students to notice the properties. So we start with images of everyday objects: tennis balls, paint pots…um, help me out; here are a million of them. Crayons—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:18):

Crayons, markers.

Tracy Zager (26:18):

Shoes, right? Sushi, origami paper, all kinds of things in the different toolkits. So there’s a series of images or a three-act task or both around those everyday objects, and then story problems grounded in that context. And then there are images with mathematical tools that bring out different ideas, but relate in some way to the image talks. And we do all of that before we get to the naked number talk. Which we do, and by the time you get to the number talk, it’s pretty quick, ’cause they’ve been reasoning about cups of lemonade. And now when you give them the actual numerals, they’re all over it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:03):

I have to say too, as somebody who—particularly in middle school—navigated math anxiety, we recently talked with Allison Hintz and Anthony Smith about their amazing book Mathematizing Children’s Literature.

Tracy Zager (27:14):

Yay!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:14):

And I was explaining, like, if I sat down at the beginning of a math class and my teacher opened a picture book and said, “We’re gonna start here,” I felt my whole body relax. And if we start with this image, if we start with just looking at an image and making sense of an image, I feel like that could be such a powerful touchstone for all the work you do from there.

Tracy Zager (27:41):

That’s core. That’s a core design principle, is that invitational access. There are no barriers to entry. There’s nothing to decode. There’s nothing formal. We’ve been learning from Dan for years about this, right? Of starting with the informal and then eventually layering in the formal. I was in a class in Maine where they were doing an image talk and it’s these boxes of pencils. It’s a stack of boxes of pencils and they’re open and you can see there are 10 pencils in each box. And so there are five boxes of pencils each with 10 pencils in it. And then the next image is 10 boxes of pencils and each box is half full. So now it’s 10 boxes each with five. And the kids are talking and talking and then the third image, I think there are seven boxes each with 10 pencils in it. And she said, “What do you think the next picture’s gonna be?” And this girl said, “You just never know with these people!” <laugh> I dunno!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:37):

That’s kinda true. Knowing you both, it’s kinda true.

Tracy Zager (28:42):

Like if it’s seven boxes with 10 in it, one kid said, I think it’s gonna be 14 boxes of five. And other kids are like, I think it’s gonna be 10 boxes with seven. And they start talking about which of those there are and the relationships between—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:58):

But they’re making sense of numbers!

Tracy Zager (28:59):

Totally. So all the kids felt invited. They can offer something up. They’re noticing and wondering about that image. They’re talking about it in whatever informal language or home language that they speak. And that was core to us. That was a huge priority, because honestly, one of the motivations to talk about fluency is that it’s always been this gatekeeper. It has served to keep kids out of meaningful math. Particularly kids from marginalized or historically excluded communities. So they’re back at the round table, doing Mad Minutes, while the more advantaged kids are getting to do rich problem solving. And so, we thought, what if we could teach fact fluency through rich problem solving that everybody could access? That was like square one for us.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:45):

That’s huge.

Dan Meyer (29:46):

That’s great to hear. What’s been helpful for me is to understand that students who are automatic, that’s just kind of what’s on the surface of things. And that below that might be some really robust kind of foundation or scaffolding that bleeds to a larger building being built, or it might be just really rickety and not offer a sturdy place to build farther up. It’s been really exciting to hear that. I wonder if you’d comment for a moment about, in the digital age and—I’m at Desmos and our sponsors are Amplify and we all work in the digital world quite a bit. There are a lot of what report to be solutions to the fluency issue, to developing fluency in the digital world. Just lots and lots of them. Some that are quite well used, others that are just like X, Y, or Z app on the market. You can find something. Do you have perspectives on these kinds of digital fluency building apps? Like, what about them works or doesn’t work? Let us know. Graham, how about you? And then Tracy, I’d love to hear your thoughts too.

Graham Fletcher (30:47):

Yeah, I think that’s a great question, ’cause there’s a lot of shiny bells and whistles out there right now that can really excite a lot of teachers. But I always come back to what works for me as a classroom teacher is probably gonna work in a digital world as well. So what are the things that I love and honor most about being in front of students, and how can I capture that in that virtual world? I think one of the things that really helps students make connections is coherence. I think coherence, especially when you leave students for—you don’t get to talk with them after the lesson is done—so I think about how we can purposefully sequence things through a day-to-day basis. I think coherence is something that gets really lost when we talk about fluency, especially with whether it be digital or whether it be print, because what ends up happening is we say, “OK, we have all these strategies we need to teach,” and it becomes a checklist. So how is it that we can just provide students the opportunity to play around in a space, whether it be digital or in person, but in a meaningful way that allows them the time and the space and that area to breathe and think, but be coherent. And connecting those lessons along the way. And I think coherence is one thing that a lot of the times it’s harder to—when we’re in the weeds, it’s so hard and difficult to zoom back out and say, “Do all these lessons connect? How do they intentionally connect? And how do they purposefully connect?” And without coherence, everything’s kind of broken down into that granular level. So when looking at—I think about Desmos and I think about the Toolkit and I think about how Tracy and I talked a lot about, “Well, this, does it connect with the context problem, does it connect with the image talk, or the lessons? Like, how does it all connect and how are we providing students an opportunity to make connections between the day-to-day instruction and lessons that we tackle?”

Tracy Zager (32:44):

I’m reminded of a conversation that Dan, you and I had a long time ago, in Portland, Maine, in a bar. I’ll just be honest. <laugh> And we were talking about how, in the earlier days of Desmos, you were stressed out by what you saw, which was kids one-on-one, on a device, in a silent room. And you were like, no, this is not it. This is not what technology is here to serve. We can do so many things better using technology appropriately, but we can’t lose talk and we can’t lose relationships and we can’t lose formative assessment and teachers listening to kids and kids listening to each other and helping each other understand their thinking. Right? So when I think about the tech that’s out there for fact fluency, most of it is gonna violate all rules I have around time testing. So that a whole bunch of it, I would just toss on that premise. They’re really no different than flashcards. It’s just flashcards set in junkyard heaps. Or, you know, underground caverns. Or with a volcano or whatever. It’s the same thing. There are some lovely visuals—I’m thinking of Berkeley Everett’s Math Flips. Those are really pretty. Mathigon has some really nice stuff that’s digital. And I think that those resources invite you to kind of ponder and notice things and talk about them. All the tools that we design in the toolkit are designed to get people talking to each other, and give teachers opportunities to pull alongside kids and listen in and understand where they are. For example, our games, we didn’t design the games to be played digitally, even though you could, and people did during COVID, because we want kids on the rug, next to each other, on their knees; I’ve seen kids like across tables. I was in a school recently where a kid was like, “I hope you believe in God, ’cause you’re going…!” You know what I mean? <laugh>. Like they’re all pumped up.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:41):

They’re invested!

Tracy Zager (34:45):

They’re psyching each other up and down and they’re interacting and it’s social and the teacher’s walking around and she’s listening to the games. And they don’t actually need any bells and whistles. They need dice and they need counters and they need this game that is actually a game. In all of our conversations, games have to actually be games. Games cannot be “roll and record.” Games have to involve strategy. They have to be fun. So in designing those games, we didn’t feel like it brought any advantage to make that a digital platform. But things that did bring advantages digitally, like the ability to project these beautiful images or to use short video in the classroom, that really was a value-add that enabled us to do something different in math class than we had done before, and to get kids talking in a different way than they ever had before. When I think about fluency, historically, if you say like, “OK, it’s time to practice our math facts,” you hear a lot of groans. And when I see a Building Fact Fluency classroom and I say, “OK, it’s BFF time!” There’s like a “YEAAAAHHH!” You know? And so that’s what we’re after.

Graham Fletcher (35:47):

It’s all about kids, really, for us. And I think at the heart of it, we made all the decisions with teachers and kids at the forefront of it.

Tracy Zager (35:55):

I know of high schoolers who are newcomers, who have experienced very little formal education, and speak in other languages, are using it as high schoolers, because it involves language and math and all the deep work in the properties and it’s accessible, but it’s also not at all condescending or patronizing. Like we designed it to be appropriate for older kids. So that’s just something that I think we’re both really proud of. One thing we thought a lot about, especially in the multiplication-division kit is how a classroom teacher could use it and a coordinating educator in EL, Title, special education, intervention could also use it because there’s so much in it, that students could get to be experts, if they got extra time in it, using something that’s related and would give them additional practice. So they could play a game a little bit earlier than the rest of the classes. And they could come in already knowing about that game, or they could do a related task. We have all these optional tasks that no classroom teacher would ever have time to teach it all. So the special educator could use it and have kids doing a Same and Different or a True/False, or some of the optional games. And then the work in both special education and general education could connect.

Dan Meyer (37:20):

I just wanna say that this is an area that for so many students, as you’ve said, Tracy, it presents a barrier. It’s a very emotionally fraught area of mathematics. And we really appreciate the wisdom you brought here. And just the care you’ve brought to the product itself. Your knowledge of teaching, knowledge of math, and yeah, especially a love for students feels like it’s really infused throughout Building Fact Fluency. If our listeners want to know more outside of this podcast, outside of the product itself, where can they find your words, your voice? Where you folks at these days? Tell ’em, Graham would you?

Graham Fletcher (37:57):

You can find us at Stenhouse, Building Fact Fluency. And then Tracy and I, currently playing around, sharing ideas a lot on Twitter, under the hashtag #BuildingFactFluency. That’s kind of where we can all come together and share ideas. And then also on the Facebook community, where there’s lots of teachers sharing ideas.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (38:19):

If you were to ask our listeners like, “Hey, if you wanna keep thinking about this, here’s something you could try or here’s something you could go do,” what could be a challenge that we could share that could help us continue this conversation?

Graham Fletcher (38:35):

Online you can actually download a full lesson string. And a lesson string is a series of activities and resources that are purposefully connected. You can pick one or two of those from the Stenhouse web site, Building Fact Fluency. You can try the game. You can try one of those strategy-based games. You can try an image talk and just see how it goes. And just share and reflect back, whether on Twitter or on Facebook. But it’s kind of there, if you wanna give it a whirl. And as Tracy was sharing, even if you’re a middle-school teacher or a high-school teacher, we really tried to think about those middle-school and high-school students keeping it grade level-agnostic. Just so every student has those opportunities for those mathematical conversations. So download a lesson string and give it a whirl, and we’d love to hear how it goes.

Dan Meyer (39:25):

Bethany and I will be working the same challenge with people in our life.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:29):

Yes.

Dan Meyer (39:29):

Enjoying some fact fluency with people in our homes, perhaps. We’ll see. And we’ll be sharing the results in the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group. Graham and Tracy, thanks so much for being here. It was such a treat to chat with you both.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:42):

I love learning with you and just helping to shift this idea of fluency into something that can be accessible and powerful and positive.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Valerie Henry says about math

“A lot of very fluent adults don’t always have every fact memorized. ”

– Val Henry

Meet the guest

Valerie Henry has been a math educator since 1986. She taught middle school math for 17 years and has worked as a lecturer at University of California Irvine since 2002. After doing her 2004 dissertation research on addition/subtraction fluency in first grade, Valerie created FactsWise, a daily mini-lesson approach that simultaneously develops  fluency,  number sense, and algebraic thinking. Additionally, she has provided curriculum and math professional development for K-12 teachers throughout her career, working with individual schools, districts, county offices of education, Illustrative Mathematics, the SBAC Digital Library, and the UCI Math Project.

An older person with short gray hair and glasses, wearing a blue sweater, is outdoors with greenery and a fence in the background.
Podcast cover for "Math Teacher Lounge" with Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer; bold text on orange and teal semicircle background.

About Math Teacher Lounge: The podcast

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Why knowledge matters in early literacy

Part of the magic of reading is that it opens up endless knowledge.

This seems to suggest a logic of first learning to read, then reading to learn.

But experts in education and the Science of Reading have actually turned that logic on its head. They say that knowledge matters first.

That’s why our elementary literacy curriculum Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA) delivers literacy skills grounded in knowledge. In fact, it’s one of only a few such programs recently recognized by the Knowledge Matters Campaign for excelling at building knowledge.

Background knowledge is essential to literacy

Reading depends on both decoding and comprehension. Many years of classroom observation and received wisdom have supported the supposition that comprehension must be taught as a discrete set of skills, while decoding arises more naturally.

But an established body of cognitive science research now shows that early literacy skills are best built deliberately, on a foundation of knowledge. In fact, knowledge-building is not a result of reading and comprehension; it’s a vital prerequisite and a fundamental part of the process. In other words: The more you know, the faster you learn.

But typically, literacy instruction focuses on decontextualized skills—finding the main idea, making inferences—rather than the content of texts and resources that students engage with.

Teachers often put the skills and strategies in the foreground, like a skill of the week, then they bring in texts that they find well suited for demonstrating the skill or strategy. So instead of harnessing skills and strategies to content, they’ve got the cart before the horse,

Natalie Wexler, author of The Knowledge Gap told host Susan Lambert on Amplify’s Science of Reading: The Podcast. “What we’re doing in elementary school can plant the seeds of failure in high school.”

When students lack access to the same sources of knowledge, they also lack equal access to reading success. That’s what experts call the knowledge gap, and it needs to be narrowed, or even eliminated, in order to achieve equality.

Wexler adds that a skills-first approach may also—despite educators’ best intentions—challenge kids’ self-esteem. “We are telling kids, ‘Just do this and you’ll become a better reader and better student.’ They do it diligently, but then if it doesn’t seem to work, they may blame themselves.”

A closer look at the knowledge gap theory

Let’s say you’re handed a passage of text describing part of a baseball game. You read the text, and then you’re asked to reenact that part of the game. Which is most likely to help you do so?

  1. Your ability to read
  2. Your knowledge of baseball
  3. It makes no difference

If you answered “2,” you’re batting 1,000. This example summarizes an influential 1988 study that concluded that the strongest predictor of comprehension was knowledge of baseball. Even the weak readers did as well as strong readers—as long as they had knowledge of baseball.

Not all students arrive at school with the same prior knowledge.

If a student who’s never heard the word “yacht” is asked to read and analyze a text passage about the Henley Royal Regatta, it’s a good bet that they won’t do as well as a student who has. Not all students visit museums, have a library of books at home, or travel outside the country or even city where they live.

Wexler cites cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham in her powerful Atlantic article “Why American Students Haven’t Gotten Better at Reading in 20 Years.” He says,

“The failure to build children’s knowledge in elementary school helps explain the gap between the reading scores of students from wealthier families and those of their lower-income peers…a gap that has been expanding—[w]ealthy children are far more likely to acquire knowledge outside of school. Poorer kids with less-educated parents tend to rely on school to acquire the kind of knowledge that is needed to succeed academically—and because their schools often focus exclusively on reading and math, in an effort to raise low test scores, they’re less likely to acquire it there.” 

How we can support teachers

Change can be challenging, says Wexler: “When you’ve been doing something for years in the belief that you’re helping kids, it can be difficult when somebody comes along and says, actually, you may be holding them back.”

We can support educators by increasing awareness of the Science of Reading, the role of knowledge in literacy, and access to tools that support educators in delivering knowledge with literacy. We can also show them what learning looks like in classrooms where all students acquire knowledge and literacy regardless of background.

We can, for example:

  • Challenge the assumption (which predates Google) that when kids encounter an unfamiliar word or topic, they can just look it up. Doing so can impose a cognitive load that can actually interfere with learning.
  • Seek out high-quality products and programs that intertwine literacy and knowledge.
  • Remind educators and decision-makers that—as Wexler puts it—”the students who blossom the most with a knowledge-building curriculum are the students who, in a skills-focused system, would be the kids in the lowest reading group. They are able to offer valuable insights and feel like full members of a classroom community.”

About Science of Reading: The Podcast

Science of Reading: The Podcast delivers insights from researchers and practitioners in early reading. Each episode takes a conversational approach and explores a timely topic related to the Science of Reading.

Identifying math anxiety

Can you do long division in your head and calculate tips in your sleep? Or does the mere thought of arithmetic keep you up at night?

If you fall into the latter camp, you’re not alone.

Math anxiety is real—and an established body of research proves it. In fact, data shows that math anxiety affects at least 20% of students.

And its effects can be damaging in both the immediate and long term. It can bring down student performance both in and beyond math, and in and outside the classroom.

Fortunately, we’re also learning how teachers can help students manage math anxiety—and succeed wherever it’s holding them back.

We explored this topic on a recent episode of Math Teacher Lounge, our biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. This season is all about recognizing and reducing math anxiety in students, with each episode featuring experts and educators who share their insights and strategies around this critical subject.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, associate professor of educational psychology at Ball State University, has been studying math anxiety for more than a decade. He joined podcast hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer to share his insights.

So let’s take a look at what math anxiety is—and is not. We’ll also explore what impact it has on learning, and what we can do about it.

What is math anxiety?

Math anxiety is more than just finding math challenging, or feeling like you’re “not a math person.” Dr. Ramirez offers this definition: “[Math anxiety] is a fear or apprehension in situations that might involve math or situations that you perceive as involving math. Anything from tests to homework to paying a tip at a restaurant.”

Math anxiety may cause sweating, rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, and other physical symptoms of anxiety.

But while math anxiety has some similarities with other forms of anxiety, it’s exclusive to math-related tasks, and comes with a unique set of characteristics and influences.

Math anxiety can lead sufferers to deliberately avoid math. And this avoidance can not only result in a student not learning math, but also limiting their academic success, career options, and even  social experiences and connections. This can look like anything from getting poor grades in math class, to tension with family members over doing math homework.

Parents and teachers can suffer from math anxiety, too. In fact, some research suggests that when teachers have math anxiety, it’s more likely that some of their students will, too.

What causes math anxiety?

It’s not correlated to high or low skill or performance in math. Students who generally don’t do well in math can experience math anxiety because they assume they’ll do poorly every time. Students who have been pressured to be high-achieving experience math anxiety because they’re worried they won’t meet expectations.

Other triggers may include:

  • Pressure. Pressure from parents or peers to do well in math can create anxiety, especially if the person feels that their worth or future success is tied to their math abilities.
  • Negative past experiences. Someone who has struggled with math or gotten negative feedback about their math skills might develop math anxiety. They may start to avoid or fear math, making it even harder to approach and improve.
  • Learning style. Different people have different learning styles. When someone’s learning style doesn’t match the way math is taught in their class or school, they may struggle and develop anxiety.
  • Cultural factors. When students hear things like, “Boys are better at math,” it can increase math anxiety in girls who may absorb the notion that they are already destined to underachieve.

Math anxiety and working memory

Dr. Ramirez has researched the important relationship between math anxiety and working memory.

Working memory refers to the ability to hold and manipulate information in short-term memory. People with math anxiety often have poorer working memory capacity when it comes to math-related tasks. This is thought to be due to the cognitive load created by anxiety, which can interfere with the ability to manage information in working memory.

The result? A negative feedback loop. Poor working memory can lead to further math anxiety, and increased anxiety can further impair working memory.

However, it’s important to note that not all individuals with math anxiety experience a decline in working memory capacity. Some may have average or above-average working memory capacity but still experience math anxiety. In such cases, the anxiety may be related to negative beliefs about one’s ability to perform math tasks, rather than an actual cognitive deficit.

What we can do about math anxiety

Even though math anxiety is a distinct type of anxiety, interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy, exposure therapy, and mindfulness approaches have been shown to be effective in reducing it.

It starts, says Dr. Ramirez, with normalizing the anxiety.

“If you’re a student and you’re struggling with math and I tell you, ‘Yeah, it’s hard, it’s OK to struggle with math,’ that makes you feel seen. And that’s gonna lead you to want to ask me more for help, because I’m someone who understands you,” says Dr. Ramirez. “And that’s a great opportunity.”

Learn more

Start your 30-day free trial of Desmos Math 6–A1.

The Reading Rope: Breaking it all down

What do pipe cleaners have to do with learning to read?

In the late 1990s, reading and literacy expert Hollis Scarborough, Ph. D., used pipe cleaners to create a model of the intertwined skills that make up the process of learning to read.

That model is the iconic Reading Rope, the visualization that helps us understand the essential strands of reading and how they work together.

In this post, we’ll examine the components of the Rope both individually and together, then explore how the Rope aligns with the Science of Reading and the five foundational reading skills.

What is the Reading Rope?

The human brain is wired to do many things, but reading is not one of them. The brain does not automatically know that certain marks on a page or screen are designed to represent sounds, or meaning. That’s why we have to teach reading, explicitly and systematically.

And when we teach reading using what science—the Science of Reading—tells us, the brain wires itself to start recognizing and understanding those letters, syllables, and words.

The Reading Rope provides a visual representation of that process and all its essential, interrelated components.

Why is the Reading Rope important for the Science of Reading?

The Reading Rope emphasizes the need for a comprehensive, deliberate approach to reading instruction. It recognizes that reading is not a singular skill, but rather a set of interwoven processes.

By understanding and addressing each of these processes (known in the Rope as strands), educators can provide the targeted instruction that helps readers succeed.

How does the Simple View of Reading connect to the Reading Rope?

One of the research-based frameworks used in the Science of Reading is the Simple View of Reading

According to the Simple View, two cognitive capacities are required for proficient reading: (1) word recognition and (2) language comprehension. 

“Reading comprehension is the product, not the sum, of those two components. If one of them is zero, then overall reading ability is going to be zero,” says Jane Oakhill, Ph.D., professor of experimental psychology at the University of Sussex.

Those two skills make up the two meta-strands of the Rope. But, as Oakhill explains further on her episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, each strand contains its own subset of distinct skills and processes.

What are the strands of the Reading Rope?

Let’s take a look:

  1. Word recognition encompasses the ability to accurately and swiftly decode printed words. Phonological awareness, phonics, and sight word recognition contribute to this strand.
    1. Phonological awareness is the ability to recognize and manipulate the individual sounds (phonemes) within spoken words. It includes skills such as identifying rhymes, segmenting words into syllables, and manipulating sounds within words. Phonological awareness provides the foundation for phonics instruction.
    2. Phonics describes the systematic relationship between letters and the sounds they represent. It includes understanding letter-sound correspondences, decoding unfamiliar words by applying sound-symbol relationships, and blending sounds to form words. Phonics instruction gives students the tools to decode printed words.
    3. Sight word recognition is the ability to recognize and read words automatically, without decoding. Building a repertoire of sight words boosts fluency.
  2. Language comprehension is the understanding of spoken and written language, including vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and the ability to make inferences and draw conclusions. Language comprehension allows readers to extract meaning from text.
    1. Vocabulary refers to the words one knows and understands, both orally and in writing. A robust vocabulary enhances comprehension and communication.
    2. Grammar and syntax are the rules and structures that govern language. Understanding and applying grammatical rules helps students comprehend and construct sentences, enhancing their ability to make meaning from text.
    3. Inference and conclusion skills describe the abilities of drawing conclusions, making predictions, and deriving implicit meaning. These skills require readers to combine their background knowledge with information in the text to make guesses and reach conclusions.

How do the strands combine to form a process? 

These strands are interconnected and mutually supportive. Strong word recognition skills enable efficient decoding, which frees up cognitive resources for language comprehension. Similarly, robust language comprehension skills facilitate deeper word understanding and contextualized reading.

That’s how the Rope represents not just the elements of learning to read, but also the process toward fluency. As students progress, their word recognition becomes increasingly automatic, and their language comprehension becomes increasingly strategic.

  • In the word recognition strand, readers focus on decoding individual words, relying on phonological awareness and phonics. With practice and instruction, word recognition becomes more efficient and effortless. This automaticity frees up cognitive resources for comprehension and higher-level thinking.
  • In the language comprehension strand, readers learn to engage actively with the text, ask questions, make connections and predictions, and monitor understanding. Strategic readers use comprehension strategies—summarizing, visualizing, self-questioning, and more—to deepen their understanding of what’s on the page. 

Those two processes are intertwined and interdependent. The Rope shows that, as readers progress, they get better at combining automatic word recognition with strategic reading skills.

They can effortlessly recognize words, allowing them to focus on comprehending the text and performing higher-level thinking. By strategically applying language comprehension skills, readers construct meaning, make connections, and analyze the text.

This combination of automatic and strategic skills supports reading and facilitates engagement with more complex and challenging texts.

How does the Rope relate to the five foundational skills of reading? 

The Rope is made of a lot more than the five foundational skills of reading (phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension). How does it all add up?

While the Reading Rope does not explicitly mention these five skills as a distinct set, the strands do align with them. Here’s how:

  1. Phonological awareness (and phonemic awareness) is represented in the Rope’s word recognition strand.
  2. Phonics is also a critical aspect of word recognition.
  3. Fluency—often considered a combination of accuracy, rate, and prosody—is not represented as its own strand, but it’s closely related to the word recognition strand. As students develop automaticity in word recognition, their reading fluency improves.
  4. Vocabulary aligns with the language comprehension strand. The development of a robust vocabulary enhances reading comprehension by enabling students to understand and infer the meaning of words encountered in the text.
  5. Comprehension is built into the language comprehension strand. It includes skills such as understanding sentence structure, making inferences, drawing conclusions, and connecting prior knowledge. These skills help the reader get meaning from the text and connect to higher-level thinking.

The Reading Rope is a game-changing tool, clarifying a complex process and helping teachers target instruction. When the strands come together, they weave the strongest possible foundation for student reading success.

Reading comprehension strategies grounded in science

When we teach reading using what science (specifically the Science of Reading) tells us, we guide the brain to start recognizing and understanding those letters, syllables, and words. And the most effective reading comprehension strategies depend not only on explicit instruction, but on building background knowledge.

Comprehension instruction: Breaking it down

According to the Simple View of Reading, two cognitive capacities are required for proficient reading: (1) decoding, and (2) language comprehension.

“Reading comprehension is the product, not the sum, of those two components,” says Dr. Jane Oakhill, professor of experimental psychology at the University of Sussex. “If one of them is zero, then overall reading ability is going to be zero.”

As Oakhill explains further on Science of Reading: The Podcast, each component contains its own set of distinct skills and processes. It’s crucial to help students develop all of these capacities.

Building mental models for new information

Some readers are great at decoding but struggle with language comprehension. Why might that be—and how can you support them?

Here’s some context: After you read this paragraph, you aren’t likely to recall the precise wording—but you will probably remember the idea. Researchers use the term mental model to describe the cognitive strategies for the structure you create in your mind to perform this feat of comprehension.

Historically, educators have thought about the process of comprehension — everything that happens after each word is recognized — as a black box. But now we know that there are two levels of comprehension at work: comprehension processes and comprehension products.

Comprehension processes are the steps you take to build a mental model of a text during reading. Comprehension products refer to the work you are able to do with that model after reading.

Think of the process of building a mental model as a sort of micro-comprehension. Weaker comprehenders build weaker models, so they may struggle when asked to create a narrative text summary, identify a theme, put together predictions, or describe key details of a character’s evolving beliefs.

By actively engaging with text, connecting prior knowledge, utilizing graphic organizers, receiving explicit instruction, and exploring new information, students can learn to build robust mental models that enhance their comprehension of the text. These mental models serve as frameworks for understanding, organizing, and synthesizing information, which then leads to improved comprehension, retention, and critical thinking.

Researchers have identified as many as 17 comprehension processes that affect students’ ability to build and use their mental models. The following are a few of the comprehension processes that weak comprehenders most commonly struggle with, and that with practice, can be targeted for skill development and improved overall comprehension.

  • Anaphora (using pronouns to refer to an earlier word or phrase): Some readers struggle to process pronoun relationships (Megherbi & Ehrlich, 2005), identify antecedents, and answer questions that require resolution of anaphora (Yuill & Oakhill, 1988).
  • Gap-filling inference: When reading the sentence “Carla forgot her umbrella and got soaking wet,” more skilled readers will conclude that it rained. A lack of awareness of when and how to activate background knowledge to fill in gaps may hinder a student’s ability to make inferences and comprehend the text as a whole (Cain & Oakhill, 1999).
  • Marker words: Writers use connective words (e.g., sothough, and yet), structure cues (e.g., meanwhile), and predictive cues (e.g., “There are three reasons why…”) to signal ways that text fits together. Students with limited knowledge of the meaning and function of these words may struggle with the meaning of the text (Oakhill, et al., 2015).
  • Comprehension monitoring: When proficient readers encounter difficulty, they tend to stop, reread, and try to figure it out. Less proficient readers may just keep going or fail to recognize that what they’re reading doesn’t fit their mental model.

Two strategies that you can employ in your classroom to guide students in comprehension strategy instruction:

  • Graphic organizers: Use graphic organizers such as concept maps, story maps, or Venn diagrams to help students learn to visually organize information and relationships within the text. Visualization enhances comprehension (Graesser, et al., 1994). As the text progresses, students can refer to and update their models.
  • Comprehension monitoring: Teach readers to monitor their comprehension while reading by pausing to reflect on their understanding, clarify confusing points, and adjust their reading strategies as needed. Monitoring comprehension helps good readers stay engaged and actively construct meaning from the text.

How background knowledge powers comprehension

The Science of Reading demonstrates the importance of systematic and explicit phonics instruction. But students don’t have to learn phonics or decoding before knowledge comes into the equation. In fact, the opposite might even be true.

Let’s say you’re handed a passage of text describing part of a baseball game. You read the text, and then you’re asked to reenact that part of the game. Which is most likely to help you do so?

  1. Your ability to read
  2. Your knowledge of baseball
  3. Neither

If you answered “2,” you’re batting 1,000. This example summarizes an influential 1988 study that concluded that the strongest predictor of comprehension was knowledge. In the study, which showed readers (with varying degrees of background knowledge about baseball) a passage describing a game, struggling readers comprehended as well as strong readers—as long as they had prior knowledge of baseball.

“The background knowledge that children bring to a text is also a contributor to language comprehension,” says Sonia Cabell, Ph.D., an associate professor at Florida State University’s School of Teacher Education, on Science of Reading: The Podcast.

In fact, background knowledge is the scaffolding upon which readers build connections between prior knowledge and new words. Students with average reading ability and some background knowledge of a topic will generally comprehend a text on that topic as well as stronger readers who lack that knowledge.

But until recently, literacy instruction has typically focused on decontextualized skills—finding the main idea, making inferences—rather than on the content of texts and resources that students engage with. According to Cabell, what we know about knowledge and comprehension should inform instruction for the whole class. “I think most, if not every, theory of reading comprehension implicates knowledge,” she says. “But that hasn’t necessarily been translated into all of our instructional approaches.”

How can we help build background knowledge while teaching reading? Here are some strategies backed by science.

  • Systematically build the knowledge that will become background knowledge. Use a curriculum grounded in topics that build on one another. “When related concepts and vocabulary show up in texts, students are more likely to retain information and acquire new knowledge,” say education and literacy experts Barbara Davidson and David Liben. According to them, this retention even continues into subsequent grades. “Knowledge sticks best when it has associated knowledge to attach to.”
  • Provide instruction that engages deeply with contentResearch shows that students—and teachers, too—actually find this content-priority approach more rewarding than, in Davidson and Liben’s words, “jumping around from topic to topic in order to practice some comprehension strategy or skill.”
  • Support students in acquiring vocabulary related to content. Presenting keywords and concepts prior to reading helps students comprehend text more deeply. Spending more time on each topic helps students learn more topic-related words and more general academic vocabulary they’ll encounter in other texts.
  • Use comprehension strategies in service of the content. While building knowledge systematically, teachers can use proven strategies—such as chunking and creating graphic organizers—to help students develop skills they can use to support their for understanding of important information.
  • Use discussions and writing to help students learn content. Invite students to share their interpretations, supporting their thought processes in their own words and connecting with peers’ perspectives.
  • Help students forge connections in small groups. Help students draw connections between reading lessons and units—and their own experiences—as they grow their knowledge base together.

Every day, the Science of Reading has more to tell us about comprehension as a multifaceted skill that requires a combination of various strategies, tools, and techniques to unlock meaning from text. Because of this body of research, we know that when educators bring intentional and evidence-based practices into the classroom, students can enhance their ability to comprehend grade level text, analyze information critically, and engage with diverse subject areas. By nurturing students’ reading comprehension skills grounded in the Science of Reading, educators can empower students to become good readers who can navigate complex texts with confidence and understanding.

Explore more

The Amplify blog:

Science of Reading: The Podcast

Dyscalculia: What educators should know

Two children seated at a table engage with colorful number cubes and a pencil beside a worksheet—a delightful way to explore math. This playful setup subtly acts as an informal dyscalculia screener, helping spot characteristics of dyscalculia in young learners.

Some kids love math. Some kids like math. Some kids struggle with math, or struggle with math anxiety. And some kids have dyscalculia, a specific learning disorder that affects one’s ability to understand numbers and learn math facts.

As awareness has continued to grow, educators today are curious to know: What are the characteristics of dyscalculia? How can I help a child with dyscalculia? What should I know about dyscalculia screeners? We’re here to provide some answers.

Dyscalculia: What it is and is not

According to the Child Mind Institute, dyscalculia (sometimes called “developmental dyscalculia”) is a term used to describe specific learning disabilities that affect a child’s ability to understand, learn, and perform math and number-based operations.

Honora Wall, Ed.D., founder of the Dyscalculia Training and Research Institute, calls it “a type of neurodivergence: A difference in brain development or function.”

That’s an important distinction: Dyscalculia is a neurological condition that affects numerical cognition and processing. It has nothing to do with being “bad at math” or not “trying hard enough.”
Between 5 and 7% of elementary school-aged children may have dyscalculia, which is believed to affect girls and boys equally.

It is important to note that not all difficulties in math are caused by dyscalculia. Dyslexia, ADHD, and other conditions can also pose challenges for math students.

Nor is dyscalculia simply “math dyslexia.” Dyscalculia and dyslexia are entirely separate learning disorders that affect different areas of cognition and involve distinct difficulties.

How dyscalculia might present itself

Dyscalculia manifests in various ways in the math classroom. Here are some examples of how it can appear:

  • When engaging in activities like games involving dice, students may need to count the individual dots to recognize a number rolled, rather than intuitively recognizing it.
  • Students might have difficulty connecting the numerical symbol “5” (for example) to the word “five.” Making this connection is essential for associating numbers with their meanings.
  • Students may be delayed in learning to count, or lose track or rely on visual aids (like their fingers) when they count.

Such students may also have a hard time:

  • Solving math problems.
  • Recognizing or creating patterns.
  • Learning basic math functions.
  • Estimating how long a task will take.
  • Processing visual-spatial ideas such as charts and graphs, or even telling left from right.
  • Remembering phone numbers or zip codes.
  • Playing games that involve counting or keeping score.
  • Telling time.

The connection between mathematics anxiety and dyscalculia

Math anxiety is an emotional response to math that presents as apprehension or fear. Some call it mathematics phobia. It may include physical symptoms such as sweating, rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, and other physical symptoms of anxiety. It’s similar to other types of anxiety, but it’s exclusive to math.

But, most important in this context, it’s not itself a neurological or cognitive condition.

So dyscalculia and math anxiety are not the same, but they may go hand in hand—perhaps with one exacerbating the other. Students with dyscalculia might develop math anxiety due to repeated challenges and frustrations in learning math.

Understanding this connection—and working to alleviate math anxiety—is crucial for educators aiming to create a supportive learning environment.

Tips for assisting students with dyscalculia

Here are some practical strategies educators can use to support students with dyscalculia:

  • Teach positive self-talk and persistence: Encourage students to develop a “growth mindset,” reinforcing that effort and persistence (as well as making mistakes) are essential to overcoming challenges.
  • Provide organizational aids: Use graph paper to help students line up numbers correctly, which aids in precision during calculations.
  • Use manipulatives: Tools like counters and blocks can make math feel more tangible, helping students grasp abstract concepts.
  • Focus on singular tasks: Present one math problem at a time to prevent students from feeling overwhelmed and allow for focused attention.
  • Allow more time: Give students the opportunity to work at their own pace, acknowledging that they may need more time to process numerical information.
  • Grant calculator access: Allowing calculators can reduce stress and help students solve problems more efficiently.
  • Make math fun and engaging: Incorporate interactive platforms such as Desmos Classroom to create an enjoyable and interactive learning experience.

More to explore

S3 – 04. Ideas to build math fluency with Valerie Henry, Graham Fletcher, and Tracy Zager

Promotional image for "Math Teacher Lounge" Season 3, Episode 4 titled "Ideas to Build Math Fluency," featuring Valerie Henry, Tracy J. Zager, and Graham Fletcher.

Fluency in math can oftentimes be associated with negative experiences with its development— timed worksheets, for example. Bethany and Dan are joined by three guests to better understand fluency and how to make its approach fun. Dr. Val Henry shares her three-part definition of fluency and her five principles for developing it. Additionally, Tracy Zager and Graham Fletcher join Bethany and Dan to better understand fluency through a lens of equity and using multimedia as a tool.

Explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page

Download Transcript

Dan Meyer (00:03)

Hey folks. Welcome back. This is Math Teacher Lounge, and I am one of your hosts, Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:07):

And I’m your other host, Bethany Lockhart Johnson. Hi, Dan.

Dan Meyer (00:11):

Hey, great to see you. We have a big one this week to chat about and some fantastic guests. We are chatting about fluency, which is the sort of word and concept that I feel like people have very, very non-neutral associations with it. A lot of them are very negative, for a lot of people.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:26):

I saw you frown a little. What’s up with that, Dan? You kind of, like, shrank.

Dan Meyer (00:30):

I have strong feelings about it. You know, there’s lots of ways that people go about helping people become fluent in mathematics. And a lot of them are harmful for students, and ineffective. And it got me thinking about fluency as it exists outside of the world of mathematics, where we have a lot of very clear images of it. We’re getting fluent in things all the time. Like, as humans. Human development is the story of fluency. And I just was wondering….Bethany, would you describe yourself as fluent at something outside of the world of mathematics? What is that? How’d you get fluent at it? What was the process?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:05):

Hmm, I think I’m a pretty fluent reader. I read all the time. I’m a happier person if I’ve read that day. I once saw this poster in a classroom; it said “10 Ways to Become a Better Reader: Read, Read, Read, Read, Read…you know, 10 times. Get it? Reading? You get better at reading by reading! So I would say reading. And it’s been kind of cool—I have a one-year-old who, it’s been really exciting slash overwhelmingly anxiety-producing to see him get very fluent with walking slash running, ’cause he’s getting faster every day. And it’s kind of fun. When I think of what’s something somebody’s trying to get fluent with…walking! He’s trying to be more fluid. He’s practicing transitions. He doesn’t wanna hold my hand while he traverses rocky terrain. He’s getting better at it. He’s practicing. What about you? What’s something…?

Dan Meyer (02:08):

I think about driving a lot. I’m a very fluent driver and I think a lot about when I was first a driver, you know? And how l have my hands on 10 and 2, vice grip, and do not talk to me; do not ask me anything; don’t ask me my NAME. I need to focus so hard. And then a year later, you know, I’m driving with one hand, smash the turn signal, take a sip off of whatever, change the CD. And then it’s no big deal.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:38):

Wait, did you pass the first time? Your test?

Dan Meyer (02:40):

Yeah, I don’t like to brag about it. <laugh> But I do all the time. <laugh> But I got a hundred on my driving test. I don’t care who knows it. And I hope it’s everybody. But I guess all of this is just to say there are areas of life where fluency feels natural, with the case of walking. There’s areas of life where fluency feels motivating, with like driving—I wanna be able to switch the CD out or whatever. And there’s areas where fluency feels terrifying and hard to come by, like mathematics, sometimes. So we have a set of guests here. Our first guest will help us figure out what do we mean by fluency? And what’s the research say about what fluency is and how students develop it in mathematics? And then our other guests will help us think about what it looks like in practice in the classroom. What are some novel, new ways to work on fluency? So first up we have Val Henry, Dr. Val Henry.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:32):

So we knew we needed help with the fluency definition, because when we think about it, it’s kind of big, right? And we wanted to look at what research about fluency really says. So we called on Valerie Henry. Val is a nationally board-certified teacher, taught middle school for 17 years, and since 2002 has worked with undergraduates graduates, credential candidates as a lecturer at the University of California, Irvine, one of my alma maters. So after doing her dissertation on addition and subtraction fluency in first grade, Val created a project to study ways to build addition and subtraction and multiplication and division fluency while also developing number sense in algebraic thinking. And the pilot grew and grew over the last 18 years into a powerful daily mini-lesson approach to facts fluency called FactsWise. And when we thought of fluency, the first person I thought of was Val. Welcome, Val Henry, to the Lounge! I’m so excited to have you here. Welcome.

Valerie Henry (04:36):

Thanks, Bethany. And thanks to you, Dan. It’s great to be here today.

Dan Meyer (04:41):

Great to have you; help yourself to whatever you find in the fridge. The names that people write down on those things in the bags are just recommendations. It’s potluck-style here. I’m curious, Val, if you’re, like, on an airplane, someone asks you what you do, and you say you study fluency…what is the layperson’s definition of what does it mean to be fluent in mathematics? And if you can give a brief tour through what the research says about what works and what doesn’t that would really help us orient our conversation here.

Valerie Henry (05:12):

The first thing I have to do when I talk to somebody on a plane is define the idea of fluency. And I often use an example of tying your shoelaces. Because that works with first graders as well as adults. This idea that when we first start trying to put our shoes on and get those shoelaces tied, somebody tries to, first of all, just do it for us. But then of course maybe tries to teach us the bunny-ears approach. And we struggle and struggle as little kids and eventually either the bunny-ears approach or something else starts to work for us. But we still have to pay attention to it. We have to think hard and it’s not easy. And then over time we get to the point where we basically don’t even think about it. When I tie my shoes in the morning. I’m not thinking about right-over-left and left-over-right and all of those things. I just do it. And so that’s a good, easy example of becoming fluent with something. I think what we’re talking about today though, is the basics, the adding and subtracting that we hope kids are going to have mastered maybe by second grade, and the multiplication and division facts that we wanna maybe have mastered by third, maybe fourth grade. So now what does that mean to become fluent with those basics? I have a three-part definition that seems to match up really nicely with the common core approach to fluency. Which is, first of all, we want the answers to be correct. And then second, we want the answers to be easy to know. And so what does that mean? Well, to me, it means without needing to count,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:12):

You mean without having to kind of muscle through it? Or say more about you mean.

Valerie Henry (07:16):

Well, I guess what I mean is that when you watch a young child try and solve something even as simple as two plus three, they might put up two fingers and then go 3, 4, 5 with three more fingers winding up on their hand, one or the other of their hands. While they’re doing that, they don’t really have a sense of whether even their answer is right or not, quite often. Especially when you get to the larger adding and subtracting problems, you can see a lot of errors happening as they’re trying to count. And it’s taking up cognitive energy to do that counting process, especially as you get to the larger quantities. So my definition of fluency now is “getting it right without needing to do that hard work like counting.” Now, some people might say, well, we just want them to have ’em memorized. But in my research, I’ve learned that a lot of very fluid adults don’t always have every fact memorized. In fact, if you ask a room full of adults, what’s seven plus nine, you might learn that they can all get it correct quickly, quickly…but they don’t all have it memorized. And so when you ask them, “How did you get that?” Many of them will say, “Well, I just gave one from the 7 to the 9 and I know that 10 plus 6 is 16.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:53):

That’s such an important distinction. My brain literally just did that actually!

Valerie Henry (08:58):

<laugh> Right? <laugh> But you’re fluid with it, because it doesn’t take you much cognitive energy at all.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:05):

Right.

Valerie Henry (09:07):

So now we have “correct without needing to put that cognitive energy,” which usually means that you’re counting. And then the third thing is “relatively quickly,” so that you’re not spending 15 seconds trying to figure it out. Even that part-whole strategy approach can be done really quickly, almost instantaneously. Or it can take a long time. So if a student can get the answer correct within, you know, three or four seconds— is I’m pretty generous—I figure that they’re pretty darn fluent with that fact. So that’s my three-part definition of these basics, fluency.

Dan Meyer (09:55):

I love the distinction between getting it correct and getting it quick. It’s possible to be quick with wrong answers. It’s possible to be like, “Those are separate components there.” And I echo Bethany’s appreciation for this third option in between knowing it instantaneously through memorization and muscling through it. But there’s like a continuum there of how much energy it took you to come up with it that all feels extremely helpful.

Valerie Henry (10:21):

And you know, one of the things that I’ve noticed is that when kids are pressured to come up with those instantaneous answers, they often default to guessing and get it wrong.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:30):

Mm, yeah.

Valerie Henry (10:30):

So that’s one of the things that I’ve learned is that as we’re trying to help students develop fluency, it’s important to start with building their conceptual understanding of what it means to do, you know, 3 times 9 and what the correct answer is, maybe using manipulatives or representations of some sort. Not skip-counting! I really have found that skip-counting just perpetuates itself in many students’ minds and that they never stop skip-counting, which means they’re putting in not very much mental energy if it’s 2 times 3 but a ton of mental energy if it’s 7 times 8. Because frankly, it’s really hard to skip count by sevens. And by eights.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:18):

I can get to 14 and then I’m like, wait, wait, what was next? Right? No, no, no…21! What do you feel are some misconceptions that maybe teachers, maybe parents have about fluency in math?

Valerie Henry (11:30):

I think maybe one of the first ones is that if students count or skip-count, their answers repetitively over and over and over and over, that they’re bound to memorize them. And the study that I did back in 2004, I actually had a school that had decided that they were going to do time tests with their students every day, all year. And that undoubtedly by the end of the year, those students would be fluent.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:06):

And to clarify by time test, you mean like, sit down, pencil, paper, ready, go, worksheet kind of thing.

Valerie Henry (12:15):

Yes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:16):

Some of us might remember quite vividly.

Valerie Henry (12:18):

<laugh> Very vividly. And you know, you have to get it done within a certain amount of time. So they made it fun for the students. Apparently the students enjoyed it. I was a little leery about that, but in the end, when I went and checked on the students and I did one-on-one assessments with half of the students in every class that were randomly selected so that I could get a sense of where they were with their fluency—and these were first graders—they basically had nothing memorized. They were simply counting as fast as they possibly could. And, you know, mostly getting the right answers. But they had not memorized. So that’s one of the myths, I think, is that repetitive practice of counting gets you to memorization.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:10):

If I put it in front of you enough times, you’ll become fluent.

Valerie Henry (13:14):

Right, right. Now these students didn’t really get any instruction, any help learning these. They just simply tested over and over and over. So that’s another thing that I think is a misconception. It’s that if we test students, but don’t really teach them fluency, then they’re going to become fluent. If we just test them every Friday or that kind of thing. And that they’ll learn them at home. But really what that means is a few lucky kids who have parents who have the time and the energy and the background to know how to help will take that job on at home. Not that many students are really that fortunate.

Dan Meyer (14:01):

It’s almost like the traditional approach, or the approach you’re describing, confuses process and product. It says, “Well, the product is that eventually fluent students will be able to do something like this, see these problems and answer them, answer them quickly,” and says, “Well, that must be the process then as well; let’s give them that products a whole lot.” But as I hear you describe fluency with bunny ears on shoelaces, there’s these images and approaches and techniques that require a very active teacher presence to support the development of it. That’s just kind of interesting to me.

Valerie Henry (14:35):

My initial project, the pilot project that I tried, was to simply ask teachers to follow five key principles. And the first one was to do something in the classroom every day for—I told them, even if you’ve only got five or 10 minutes, work on fluency for five or 10 minutes a day, and let’s see what happens. So that was one key element was just to teach it and to give students opportunities to get what the research calls for when you’re trying to memorize, which is actually immediate feedback. When I talk about immediate feedback with my student teachers, I say, “I’m talking about within one or two seconds of trying a problem, and then sort of immediately knowing, getting feedback of whether you got the answer right or not so that your brain can kind of gain that confidence. ‘Oh, not only did I come up with an answer, but somebody’s telling me it’s the correct answer.’”

Dan Meyer (15:38):

There’s a lot of apps now in the digital world that offer students questions about arithmetic or other kinds of mathematical concepts and give immediate feedback of a sort: the feedback of “You’re right; you’re wrong” sort. Is that effective fluency development, in your view?

Valerie Henry (15:57):

I haven’t heard and I haven’t seen them being super-effective. The ways I think about this are “Immediate feedback isn’t the only thing we need.” Probably one of the biggest things that we need is for students to develop strategies. And this is one of the other things I’ve learned from international research, from countries that do have students who become very fluent very early, is that they don’t shoot straight for memorization, but they go through this process of taking students from doing some counting and then quickly moving them to trying to use logic. So, “Hey, you really are confident that 2 + 2 is 4; so now let’s use that to think about 2 + 3.” Actually, as an algebra teacher, I would much rather have students that have a combination of memorization and these strategies, than students who’ve only memorized. Isn’t that interesting that my most successful algebra students were good strategy thinkers. Not just good memorizers.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (17:09):

So you mentioned there were five that kind of helped root this idea in like, “What can teachers do? What is the best thing that teachers can do to support with fact fluency?” So, everyday was key.

Valerie Henry (17:22):

Then the next principle that I really focus on is switching immediately to the connected subtractions so that students—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (17:33):

Not waiting until you’ve gotten all the way through addition. But making “Ooh!”

Valerie Henry (17:38):

Totally. And I didn’t do that the first year. And when we looked at the results of the assessments at the end of the year, we realized that our students were so much weaker in subtraction than addition. So the following pilot year, we tried this other approach of doing subtraction right after the students had developed some fluency with that small chunk of addition. And we got such better subtraction results.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (18:11):

What are the other principles?

Valerie Henry (18:13):

The biggest one is to use these strategies. So the strategies makes the third. And then the fourth I would say is to go from concrete to representational to abstract.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (18:27):

Don’t put away those manipulatives. Don’t put away those tools.

Valerie Henry (18:31):

Oh, so important to come back to them for multiplication and division. And my fifth principle is to wait on assessment. To use it as true assessment, but not race to start testing before students have had a chance to go through this three-phase process. Which is conceptual understanding with manipulatives; building strategies, usually with representations; and then working on building some speed until it’s just that natural fluency.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:07):

I wanna say thank you so much for offering your really learned perspective, because you have not only done the research, but seen it in action and seen how shifting our notions of fluency and what fluency can be and what a powerful foundation it can be for all mathematicians. Really, that shift is so powerful. And I appreciate you sharing it with our listeners and with us. So we’re so excited that we got to talk with you today, Val—

Dan Meyer (19:35):

Thank you, Dr. Henry.

Valerie Henry (19:37):

You’re welcome!

Dan Meyer (19:41):

With us now we have Graham Fletcher and Tracy Zager, a couple of people who understand fluency at a very deep and classroom level. I wanna introduce them and get their perspective on what we’re trying to solve here with fluency. So Graham Fletcher has served in education in a lot of different roles: as a classroom teacher, math coach, math specialist, and he’s continually seeking new and innovative ways to support students and teachers in their development of conceptual understanding in elementary math. He’s the author, along with Tracy, of Building Fact Fluency, a fluency kit we’ll talk about, and openly shares so much of his wisdom and resources at gfletchy.com. Tracy Johnson Zager is a district math coach who loves to get teachers hooked on listening to kids’ mathematical ideas. She is a co-author of this toolkit, Building Fact Fluency, and the author of Becoming the Math Teacher You Wish You’d Had: Ideas and Strategies from Vibrant Classrooms. Tracy also edits professional books for teachers at Stenhouse Publishers, including, yours truly. Thank you for all that insight, Tracy, and support on the book.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (20:49):

Dan and I were talking at the beginning of the episode about things we feel like, “Hey, I’m fluent in that. I’m fluent in that.”

Dan Meyer (20:55):

Just very curious: What’s something you would like to get fluent in outside of the world of mathematics, let’s say?

Tracy Zager (21:00):

I’ll say understanding the teenage brain, as the parent of a 13-year-old and 15-year-old. That’s the main thing I’m working on becoming fluent in!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:10):

Ooh!

Dan Meyer (21:13):

A language fluency, perhaps. All right, Graham. How about you?

Graham Fletcher (21:16):

For me typing, it’s always been an Achilles heel of mine. So voice-to-text has been my friend. But it’s also been my nemesis in much of my texting here and working virtually over the last couple years. So yeah, typing.

Dan Meyer (21:33):

Do you folks have some way of helping us understand the difference in how fluency is handled by instructors and by learners?

Tracy Zager (21:40):

I would say that the lay meaning of fluency is definitely a little different than what we mean in the math education realm. When we’re talking about math fact fluency, which is just one type of fluency. So you gotta think about procedural fluency and computational fluency; there are lots of types of fluency in math. And Graham and I had the luxury of really focusing in specifically on math fact fluency. We’re looking at kind of a subset of the procedural fluency. So the words you hear in all the citations are accurate, efficient, and flexible. There’s this combination of kids get the right answer in a reasonable amount of time and with a reasonable amount of work and they can match their strategy or their approach to the situation. That’s where that flexibility comes in. And there’s like lots more I wanna say about that about sort of…I think one issue that comes up around fluency is that people are in a little bit of a rush. So they tend to think of the fluency as this automaticity or recall of known facts without having to think about it. And that is part of the end goal, but that’s not the journey to fluency. So this is one of the things that Graham and I thought about a lot was the path to fluency. The goal here it’s that student in middle school who’s learning something new doesn’t have to expend any effort to gather that fact. And they might do it because they’ve done it so many different ways that they’ve got it, and now they just know it, or they might be like my friend who’s a mathematician who still, if you say, “Six times 8,” she thinks in her head, “Twelve, 24, 48…” and she does this double-double-double associative property strategy. And it’s so efficient, you would never know. And that’s totally great. That’s fine. That’s not slowing her down. That’s not providing a drag in the middle of a more complex problem or new learning. So we’re really focused on having elementary school students be able to enter the middle and high school standards without having that pull out of the new thinking.

Graham Fletcher (23:53):

And as I think about that, I think about how so many students will memorize their facts, but then they haven’t memorized them with understanding. So that when they move into middle school and they move into high school, it’s almost like new knowledge and new understanding that’s applied from a stand-alone skill.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:10):

So something that felt really unique to me, Graham, as I was diving into the toolkit, is your use of images, Tracy, Graham, is the way that you use images to help students notice and wonder to start making sense of these quantities and the decomposition of numbers using images. Can you talk a little bit about how images played a part in the way that you think about this building a fact fluency?

Graham Fletcher (24:41):

What I realized is so many times when we approach math with just naked numbers with so many of our elementary students, the numbers aren’t visible. The quantities. They can’t see them; they can’t move them. They’re just those squiggly figures that we were talking about earlier on. So how is it that we make the quantities visible, to where students feel as if they can grab an apple and move it around? Because a lot of times we start with the naked numbers and then if kids don’t get the naked numbers, then we kind of backfill it. But what would happen if we start with the images? And then from there, these rich, flourishing mathematical conversations develop from the images. And I think that was the premise and the goal of the toolkit.

Tracy Zager (25:22):

When you look at how fact fluency has traditionally been taught, it’s all naked numbers. And sometimes we wrote ’em sideways. Like, that’s it. That was our variety of task type. Right? Sometimes it’s vertical; sometimes it’s horizontal. And that was it. And I’ve just known way too many kids who couldn’t find a hook to hang their hat on with that. It didn’t connect to anything. And so part of why I knew Graham was the perfect person for this project was his strength in multimedia photography, art, video. And so we started from this idea of contexts that for each lesson string in the toolkit, there’s some kind of context. An everyday object, arranged in some kind of a way that reveals mathematical structure and invites students to notice the properties. So we start with images of everyday objects: tennis balls, paint pots…um, help me out; here are a million of them. Crayons—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:18):

Crayons, markers.

Tracy Zager (26:18):

Shoes, right? Sushi, origami paper, all kinds of things in the different toolkits. So there’s a series of images or a three-act task or both around those everyday objects, and then story problems grounded in that context. And then there are images with mathematical tools that bring out different ideas, but relate in some way to the image talks. And we do all of that before we get to the naked number talk. Which we do, and by the time you get to the number talk, it’s pretty quick, ’cause they’ve been reasoning about cups of lemonade. And now when you give them the actual numerals, they’re all over it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:03):

I have to say too, as somebody who—particularly in middle school—navigated math anxiety, we recently talked with Allison Hintz and Anthony Smith about their amazing book Mathematizing Children’s Literature.

Tracy Zager (27:14):

Yay!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:14):

And I was explaining, like, if I sat down at the beginning of a math class and my teacher opened a picture book and said, “We’re gonna start here,” I felt my whole body relax. And if we start with this image, if we start with just looking at an image and making sense of an image, I feel like that could be such a powerful touchstone for all the work you do from there.

Tracy Zager (27:41):

That’s core. That’s a core design principle, is that invitational access. There are no barriers to entry. There’s nothing to decode. There’s nothing formal. We’ve been learning from Dan for years about this, right? Of starting with the informal and then eventually layering in the formal. I was in a class in Maine where they were doing an image talk and it’s these boxes of pencils. It’s a stack of boxes of pencils and they’re open and you can see there are 10 pencils in each box. And so there are five boxes of pencils each with 10 pencils in it. And then the next image is 10 boxes of pencils and each box is half full. So now it’s 10 boxes each with five. And the kids are talking and talking and then the third image, I think there are seven boxes each with 10 pencils in it. And she said, “What do you think the next picture’s gonna be?” And this girl said, “You just never know with these people!” <laugh> I dunno!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:37):

That’s kinda true. Knowing you both, it’s kinda true.

Tracy Zager (28:42):

Like if it’s seven boxes with 10 in it, one kid said, I think it’s gonna be 14 boxes of five. And other kids are like, I think it’s gonna be 10 boxes with seven. And they start talking about which of those there are and the relationships between—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:58):

But they’re making sense of numbers!

Tracy Zager (28:59):

Totally. So all the kids felt invited. They can offer something up. They’re noticing and wondering about that image. They’re talking about it in whatever informal language or home language that they speak. And that was core to us. That was a huge priority, because honestly, one of the motivations to talk about fluency is that it’s always been this gatekeeper. It has served to keep kids out of meaningful math. Particularly kids from marginalized or historically excluded communities. So they’re back at the round table, doing Mad Minutes, while the more advantaged kids are getting to do rich problem solving. And so, we thought, what if we could teach fact fluency through rich problem solving that everybody could access? That was like square one for us.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:45):

That’s huge.

Dan Meyer (29:46):

That’s great to hear. What’s been helpful for me is to understand that students who are automatic, that’s just kind of what’s on the surface of things. And that below that might be some really robust kind of foundation or scaffolding that bleeds to a larger building being built, or it might be just really rickety and not offer a sturdy place to build farther up. It’s been really exciting to hear that. I wonder if you’d comment for a moment about, in the digital age and—I’m at Desmos and our sponsors are Amplify and we all work in the digital world quite a bit. There are a lot of what report to be solutions to the fluency issue, to developing fluency in the digital world. Just lots and lots of them. Some that are quite well used, others that are just like X, Y, or Z app on the market. You can find something. Do you have perspectives on these kinds of digital fluency building apps? Like, what about them works or doesn’t work? Let us know. Graham, how about you? And then Tracy, I’d love to hear your thoughts too.

Graham Fletcher (30:47):

Yeah, I think that’s a great question, ’cause there’s a lot of shiny bells and whistles out there right now that can really excite a lot of teachers. But I always come back to what works for me as a classroom teacher is probably gonna work in a digital world as well. So what are the things that I love and honor most about being in front of students, and how can I capture that in that virtual world? I think one of the things that really helps students make connections is coherence. I think coherence, especially when you leave students for—you don’t get to talk with them after the lesson is done—so I think about how we can purposefully sequence things through a day-to-day basis. I think coherence is something that gets really lost when we talk about fluency, especially with whether it be digital or whether it be print, because what ends up happening is we say, “OK, we have all these strategies we need to teach,” and it becomes a checklist. So how is it that we can just provide students the opportunity to play around in a space, whether it be digital or in person, but in a meaningful way that allows them the time and the space and that area to breathe and think, but be coherent. And connecting those lessons along the way. And I think coherence is one thing that a lot of the times it’s harder to—when we’re in the weeds, it’s so hard and difficult to zoom back out and say, “Do all these lessons connect? How do they intentionally connect? And how do they purposefully connect?” And without coherence, everything’s kind of broken down into that granular level. So when looking at—I think about Desmos and I think about the Toolkit and I think about how Tracy and I talked a lot about, “Well, this, does it connect with the context problem, does it connect with the image talk, or the lessons? Like, how does it all connect and how are we providing students an opportunity to make connections between the day-to-day instruction and lessons that we tackle?”

Tracy Zager (32:44):

I’m reminded of a conversation that Dan, you and I had a long time ago, in Portland, Maine, in a bar. I’ll just be honest. <laugh> And we were talking about how, in the earlier days of Desmos, you were stressed out by what you saw, which was kids one-on-one, on a device, in a silent room. And you were like, no, this is not it. This is not what technology is here to serve. We can do so many things better using technology appropriately, but we can’t lose talk and we can’t lose relationships and we can’t lose formative assessment and teachers listening to kids and kids listening to each other and helping each other understand their thinking. Right? So when I think about the tech that’s out there for fact fluency, most of it is gonna violate all rules I have around time testing. So that a whole bunch of it, I would just toss on that premise. They’re really no different than flashcards. It’s just flashcards set in junkyard heaps. Or, you know, underground caverns. Or with a volcano or whatever. It’s the same thing. There are some lovely visuals—I’m thinking of Berkeley Everett’s Math Flips. Those are really pretty. Mathigon has some really nice stuff that’s digital. And I think that those resources invite you to kind of ponder and notice things and talk about them. All the tools that we design in the toolkit are designed to get people talking to each other, and give teachers opportunities to pull alongside kids and listen in and understand where they are. For example, our games, we didn’t design the games to be played digitally, even though you could, and people did during COVID, because we want kids on the rug, next to each other, on their knees; I’ve seen kids like across tables. I was in a school recently where a kid was like, “I hope you believe in God, ’cause you’re going…!” You know what I mean? <laugh>. Like they’re all pumped up.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:41):

They’re invested!

Tracy Zager (34:45):

They’re psyching each other up and down and they’re interacting and it’s social and the teacher’s walking around and she’s listening to the games. And they don’t actually need any bells and whistles. They need dice and they need counters and they need this game that is actually a game. In all of our conversations, games have to actually be games. Games cannot be “roll and record.” Games have to involve strategy. They have to be fun. So in designing those games, we didn’t feel like it brought any advantage to make that a digital platform. But things that did bring advantages digitally, like the ability to project these beautiful images or to use short video in the classroom, that really was a value-add that enabled us to do something different in math class than we had done before, and to get kids talking in a different way than they ever had before. When I think about fluency, historically, if you say like, “OK, it’s time to practice our math facts,” you hear a lot of groans. And when I see a Building Fact Fluency classroom and I say, “OK, it’s BFF time!” There’s like a “YEAAAAHHH!” You know? And so that’s what we’re after.

Graham Fletcher (35:47):

It’s all about kids, really, for us. And I think at the heart of it, we made all the decisions with teachers and kids at the forefront of it.

Tracy Zager (35:55):

I know of high schoolers who are newcomers, who have experienced very little formal education, and speak in other languages, are using it as high schoolers, because it involves language and math and all the deep work in the properties and it’s accessible, but it’s also not at all condescending or patronizing. Like we designed it to be appropriate for older kids. So that’s just something that I think we’re both really proud of. One thing we thought a lot about, especially in the multiplication-division kit is how a classroom teacher could use it and a coordinating educator in EL, Title, special education, intervention could also use it because there’s so much in it, that students could get to be experts, if they got extra time in it, using something that’s related and would give them additional practice. So they could play a game a little bit earlier than the rest of the classes. And they could come in already knowing about that game, or they could do a related task. We have all these optional tasks that no classroom teacher would ever have time to teach it all. So the special educator could use it and have kids doing a Same and Different or a True/False, or some of the optional games. And then the work in both special education and general education could connect.

Dan Meyer (37:20):

I just wanna say that this is an area that for so many students, as you’ve said, Tracy, it presents a barrier for their inclusion in mathematics. It’s a very emotionally fraught area of mathematics. And we really appreciate the wisdom you brought here. And just the care you’ve brought to the product itself. Your knowledge of teaching, knowledge of math, and yeah, especially a love for students feels like it’s really infused throughout Building Fact Fluency. If our listeners want to know more outside of this podcast, outside of the product itself, where can they find your words, your voice? Where you folks at these days? Tell ’em, Graham would you?

Graham Fletcher (37:57):

You can find us at Stenhouse, Building Fact Fluency. And then Tracy and I, currently playing around, sharing ideas a lot on Twitter, under the hashtag #BuildingFactFluency. That’s kind of where we can all come together and share ideas. And then also on the Facebook community, where there’s lots of teachers sharing ideas.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (38:19):

If you were to ask our listeners like, “Hey, if you wanna keep thinking about this, here’s something you could try or here’s something you could go do,” what could be a challenge that we could share that could help us continue this conversation?

Graham Fletcher (38:35):

Online you can actually download a full lesson string. And a lesson string is a series of activities and resources that are purposefully connected. You can pick one or two of those from the Stenhouse web site, Building Fact Fluency. You can try the game. You can try one of those strategy-based games. You can try an image talk and just see how it goes. And just share and reflect back, whether on Twitter or on Facebook. But it’s kind of there, if you wanna give it a whirl. And as Tracy was sharing, even if you’re a middle-school teacher or a high-school teacher, we really tried to think about those middle-school and high-school students keeping it grade level-agnostic. Just so every student has those opportunities for those mathematical conversations. So download a lesson string and give it a whirl, and we’d love to hear how it goes.

Dan Meyer (39:25):

Bethany and I will be working the same challenge with people in our life.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:29):

Yes.

Dan Meyer (39:29):

Enjoying some fact fluency with people in our homes, perhaps. We’ll see. And we’ll be sharing the results in the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group. Graham and Tracy, thanks so much for being here. It was such a treat to chat with you both.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:42):

I love learning with you and just helping to shift this idea of fluency into something that can be accessible and powerful and positive.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Valerie Henry says about math

“A lot of very fluent adults don’t always have every fact memorized. ”

– Val Henry

Meet the guests

Valerie Henry has been a math educator since 1986. She taught middle school math for 17 years and has worked as a lecturer at University of California Irvine since 2002. After doing her 2004 dissertation research on addition/subtraction fluency in first grade, Valerie created FactsWise, a daily mini-lesson approach that simultaneously develops  fluency,  number sense, and algebraic thinking. Additionally, she has provided curriculum and math professional development for K-12 teachers throughout her career, working with individual schools, districts, county offices of education, Illustrative Mathematics, the SBAC Digital Library, and the UCI Math Project.

Graham Fletcher has served in education as a classroom teacher, a math coach, and currently as a math specialist. He is continually seeking new and innovative ways to support students and teachers in their development of conceptual understanding in elementary mathematics. He is the author of Building Fact Fluency and openly shares many of his resources at gfletchy.com. Follow him on Twitter.

Tracy Johnston Zager is a district math coach who loves to get teachers hooked on listening to kids’ mathematical ideas. She is a co-author of the Building Fact Fluency toolkits and the author of Becoming the Math Teacher You Wish You’d Had: Ideas and Strategies from Vibrant Classrooms. Tracy also edits professional books by teachers, for teachers at Stenhouse Publishers. Follow her on Facebook.

A collage of three headshots: an older woman with glasses, a man with a beard in a blue shirt, and a woman with dark hair smiling in front of greenery.
A graphic with the text "Math Teacher Lounge with Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer" on colored overlapping circles.

About Math Teacher Lounge: The podcast

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Season 9, Episode 8

Cognitive science-informed teaching, with Natalie Wexler

In this episode, Susan Lambert rejoins podcast alum Natalie Wexler to discuss Natalie’s new book Beyond the Science of Reading: Connecting Literacy Instruction to the Science of Learning. Listeners will gain insights into why this topic is important, what this book offers educators, why Natalie was so drawn to writing this book, and what cognitive science-informed teaching looks like in general. Natalie addresses how cognitive load theory works in practice with literacy, misconceptions about focusing only on phonics, and scaling science-informed instruction. Natalie also answers a question from the listener mailbag about encouraging colleagues to adopt an evidence-based approach.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Portrait of a woman with short, curly blond hair wearing a white top, pictured inside a circular frame with an illustrated pencil and lines accent, reflecting her dedication to teaching reading and cognitive science.

Natalie Wexler

Natalie Wexler is the author of Beyond the Science of Reading: Connecting Literacy Instruction to the Science of Learning, coming from ASCD on Jan. 21, 2025. She is also the author of The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System—and How to Fix It and the co-author, with Judith C. Hochman, Ed.D., of The Writing Revolution: A Guide to Advancing Thinking Through Writing in All Subjects and Grades. She has a free Substack newsletter called Minding the Gap, and she was the host of the Reading Comprehension Revisited podcast, Season One. More information is available on her website, www.nataliewexler.com.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is the Chief Academic Officer of Elementary Humanities at Amplify, and the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. As a former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, Lambert is dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Portrait of a woman with short blonde hair, wearing glasses, a black top, and a necklace. She is smiling and facing the camera.

Quotes

“We’re overlooking the ways in which the typical approach to teaching reading comprehension and writing actually conflict with what cognitive science tells us about how people learn to do those things.”

—Natalie Wexler

“We spend much more time trying to teach them to read, but we kind of expect them to just pick up writing. You know, for most kids, it does not happen.”

—Natalie Wexler

“No matter how good you are at making inferences, if you don't have the requisite background knowledge, you're not gonna be able to do it.”

—Natalie Wexler

“It doesn't work to just ask inexperienced writers to just write down stuff. That is not going to provide the cognitive benefits.”

—Natalie Wexler

“Language is connected to thinking. If you can talk and write in a more sophisticated way that reflects that you are thinking in a more sophisticated way.”

—Natalie Wexler

Season 8, Episode 11

Cognitive load theory: Four items at a time, with Greg Ashman

Greg Ashman—author of multiple books including A Little Guide for Teachers: Cognitive Load Theory, deputy principal, and professor—sits down with Susan Lambert on this episode to discuss cognitive load theory and how it applies to how students learn and how to best teach them. Together their conversation covers cognitive load theory, including an exploration of working memory and long-term memory; intrinsic load and extraneous load; biologically primary vs. biologically secondary knowledge; and how to apply these concepts in the classroom. Ashman also provides listeners with helpful advice on ensuring their teaching practices are based on evidence.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Greg Ashman, Ph.D.

Greg Ashman, Ph.D.

Greg Ashman, Ph.D., is the deputy principal at Ballarat Clarendon College, Victoria. He is an honorary fellow at the Australian Centre for the Advancement of Literacy, Australian Catholic University, and a part-time professor at Academica University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam. Greg is a prolific writer and has written three books: The Truth About Teaching: An Evidence-informed Guide for New TeachersThe Power of Explicit Teaching and Direct Instruction, and A Little Guide for Teachers: Cognitive Load Theory. He also produces a newsletter at fillingthepail.substack.com. Prior to moving to Australia, Greg worked at three government schools in London as a teacher, head of science and deputy principal.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is the Chief Academic Officer of Elementary Humanities at Amplify, and the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Her career has been focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. As a former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, Lambert is dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Retrato de una mujer caucásica sonriente con cabello rubio corto, involucrada en un podcast sobre la ciencia de la lectura, con gafas, lápiz labial rojo y un collar de perlas.

Quotes

“I now know I shouldn't have felt guilty, but I also know that I could have taught that from the outset in a much more structured way where the students would have left understanding the concepts better without wasting time.”

—Greg Ashman

“I now know I shouldn't have felt guilty, but I also know that I could have taught that from the outset in a much more structured way where the students would have left understanding the concepts better without wasting time.”—Greg Ashman “This idea that kids don't need to know anything anymore, they just need to practice skills is really quite a pernicious and damaging idea.”

—Greg Ashman

“Think about the teaching methods that you're being presented with. Ask about the evidence and question whether this is really the optimal way of teaching literacy or whatever it is, or whether it's more based on wishful thinking.”

—Greg Ashman

Season 10, Episode 2

Orthographic mapping is a cognitive process, with Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D., founder of The Reading Institute and director of the Advanced Certificates in Reading Science, Brooklyn College. An expert in orthographic mapping, Pace Miles explains why it’s a cognitive process, why that means it can’t be “taught,” and how we can instead leverage an understanding of it to inform instructional practices across reading, writing, and spelling to improve comprehension. Pace Miles outlines what it takes to develop good word-reading habits in emergent readers, and offers step-by-step advice on how to implement quick intervention when needed.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with curly hair smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with a yellow light bulb illustration in the bottom right corner—perfect for a science of reading podcast or content aimed at emergent readers.

Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D., is an associate professor and the Director of the Advanced Certificates in Reading Science at Brooklyn College, part of the City University of New York (CUNY). Pace Miles is the author of the Reading Ready intervention program, co-author of the Reading Ready for Whole Phonics program and the book Making Words Stick, and academic advisor for Reading Go. She is also the co-founder and principal investigator of CUNY Reading Fellows, which improves preservice teacher training and provides free high-dosage tutoring to over 2,300 historically underserved New York City students every year; and the founder and president of The Reading Institute, which brings free evidence-based tutoring programs to readers across the country and provides reading-science-aligned professional development to teachers.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“You don't teach orthographic mapping, 'cause, again, that's a cognitive process, but you can facilitate support for long-term storage of words.”

—Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

“Never acquiesce to illiteracy. We all, as a community that supports all readers, have to figure out what instruction needs to be provided and what dosage over what duration of time … and it will happen.”

—Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

“If you're focused only on phonics and not on spelling, you are going to miss a whole bunch of decoding instruction, word analysis work.”

—Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

“You don't need a Ph.D. to have that knowledge. That should come in all teacher training. The complexity of the English language—every teacher I've ever met can handle it once we teach it.”

—Katie Pace Miles, Ph.D.

What instructional coherence really looks like

What instructional coherence really looks like

To view this protected page, enter the password below:



Beyond the Knowledge Gap: Cognitive Load, Writing, and Literacy

S5-01. Investigating math anxiety in the classroom

A blue graphic with text reading "Math Teacher Lounge" in multicolored letters and "Amplify." at the bottom, with abstract geometric shapes and lines as decoration.

Season 5 is here! This season, we’ll be talking all about math anxiety: what it is, what causes it, and what we can do to prevent or ease this anxiety in the math classroom. To launch this very important theme, we sat down with Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, associate professor of educational psychology at Ball State University.
 
As someone who’s been studying math anxiety for more than a decade, he had some interesting research and advice to share on why math anxiety affects so many students (and adults), and tips for how to start reducing it.
 
Listen now and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!
 
Enjoy this episode and explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page.

Download Transcript

Dan Meyer (00:01):
Hey, folks. Welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge. I’m one of your hosts, Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:05):
And I am your other host. I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson. Season five! Hello!

Dan Meyer (00:11):
Bethany, how are you doing? How have you been spending the long break between our recording sessions?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:16):
As much as I loved sharing content from previous seasons, I am so thrilled that we’re back for season five. I have been, you know, chasing a toddler. I think he’s already tired of me saying, “Ooh, can we count that?” He’s like [sighs] “One two, one two.” Like, he’s done already.

Dan Meyer (00:36):
Too much counting. Yeah, I worry about that so much, that my love of mathematics might be perceived by my kids as smothering. Yeah, I worry about the same. We shared with you folks some bangers of reruns, in my humble opinion. Some great guests. But, we’ve been excited—me and Bethany—to hop back on the mics, on the ones and twos, and explore some new ideas together.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:01):
Well, I loved our season talking about joy in mathematics. And personally I could…like, we could turn this whole podcast into joy in mathematics. However, we’re kind of going a different route. Because if you ask folks why they don’t feel joy in mathematics, a lot of times at the root of that is some really intense math anxiety. So this whole season, we’re going to be delving into math anxiety. Exploring what it is, who has it, why do we think it happens, what do we think we can do about it, and how can we navigate through it, so that we can experience that joy in math? These are questions that we’re gonna explore over the course of the season. Dan Meyer, how do you feel about that?

Dan Meyer (01:49):
It feels big and it feels personal. I mean, as we shared in our math stories back from season…whatever it was, math anxiety was a huge part.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:59):
It was last season, Dan.

Dan Meyer (02:00):
Last…? I mean, who can remember? Big part of your journey. I’ve had some very punctuated but intense moments of anxiety in math class. And socially, we have built math up to be this incredibly powerful thing. You know, restricting movement on economic ladders, preventing people from getting into careers they want. Whether or not they have much to do with math class, math anxiety is a really large part of educational but also social life. And yeah, I’m really excited to explore it with you. We’re bringing on some really excellent guests. Some researchers, yes. But not just researchers! Also people who practice in the field and know firsthand what it looks like to resolve issues of anxiety with students.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:45):
Yeah, you’re right, Dan. My math story contained quite a bit of math anxiety, so I am particularly invested in this season. I mean, I still navigate math anxiety. And, you know, many of us do, and let’s talk about it. And let’s—I love that you reminded me. We’re gonna have a lot of great researchers all throughout the season, and a lot of times folks feel like the research happening, there’s sometimes a gap between researchers and what’s actually happening in the classroom. Not in all cases, but a lot of times. Right? And I remember a lot of conversation about the latest research when I was in grad school, but unless you’re actively studying something, sometimes we don’t know what’s happening. Right? We’re really focused on what’s happening right in front of us in our classroom. So let’s take some of that research; let’s break it down; let’s talk to some of the folks who are thinking about this for the bulk of their day, right?

Dan Meyer (03:41):
Yep. So we got our first guest coming up in a moment here.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:45):
So to kick off this season, we’re starting episode one by talking to Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at Ball State University. And he’s been researching math anxiety for more than a decade. He’s worked with so many amazing folks in the field. He’s worked with students, he’s worked with teachers, with educators…I’m just so excited to talk to him. If you look up math anxiety, you see his name as one of the folks who is really thinking about this at so many different angles, and we get to talk to him. So enjoy our conversation with Dr. Gerardo Ramirez.

Dan Meyer (04:29):
We are so excited to have Dr. Gerardo Ramirez on the show with us. Dr. Ramirez is an Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at Ball State University. Thanks so much for joining us.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (04:40):
Yeah, thank you for inviting me to talk about math anxiety.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:43):
So with your interview, Dr. Ramirez, we are actually launching the season. We’re gonna be talking about all different aspects of math anxiety, and it feels pretty perfect that you are first guest of the season, because of the sheer breadth of research and conversations you’ve had about math anxiety. Could you start us off kind of telling us a story of how did you get interested in studying math anxiety? Or why, you know, why did you dive into this topic that, you know, I think a lot of folks might…like, if you’re on a plane, and you say, “Oh, I study math anxiety,” what kind of reaction are you gonna get?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (05:24):
Oh, sure. Yeah. I think most people are actually very interested because they all have their own story about feeling anxious about math, or just being anxious about evaluation situations that involve math. And, yeah, they wanna share those stories. People feel quite comfortable talking about their anxiety about math, for some reason. But for me, I started off, when I was in undergrad, I was studying to take the GRE quiz. I was hoping to go into a psych program. But I wasn’t exactly sure what direction yet. As I took some of the practice tests, there’s some situations in which I was very nervous about taking the practice test. And I just noticed that I did really poorly on some of these exams. And so I became very interested in issues like choking under pressure, which means when you underperform relative to what you expected to perform. And so, as I was researching these issues, I started to come across this whole field of math anxiety. And I saw that while there are some people who choke under pressure during tests, there are other people who just have a strong general fear of mathematics.

Dan Meyer (06:29):
That’s really helpful. I can imagine you’re doing a lot of free psychology sessions, free therapy for people on airplanes when they bring to you their own stories of math. So let’s thank you for your service in that sense. I’m super-curious. So Bethany and I have both taught math. We both have seen firsthand what it looks like when a student is anxious in math class, though maybe we don’t have kind of the clinical language to describe it. And I’m curious, from a clinical sense, how do we define math anxiety?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (06:57):
Sure. So first off, math anxiety is not something that you would find in the DSM, for instance. But we generally define that as a fear or apprehension to situations that involve math. So it doesn’t have to necessarily be educational situations. It could be someone asks you a math-related question during a party, or you have to calculate the tip at a restaurant, for instance. It doesn’t have to be about schooling situations, although that’s obviously where it seems to matter a lot for many people. So it is basically a fear or apprehension to situations that involve math. And I think distinguishing the term “fear” from “anxiety” is really important here. A lot of times people use those terms interchangeably, and the term “fear” is obviously within our definition of math anxiety. But oftentimes what differentiates anxiety from fear is that, anxiety is—think of it like a recipe. Anxiety is fear plus a little bit of unknown. OK? So if, for instance, if you hated snakes, and they threw a snake at you, you’d be in intense fear. Whereas if you hated snakes and they said, “There is a snake in the room, but I’m not gonna tell you where,” that’s gonna cause anxiety. And so the reason why we call it math anxiety is because a lot of times people experience this fear for a possible unknown future that involves math or possible unknown evaluations that people might have about your competence, because of math. And so for a lot of kids, they feel anxious about how they’re gonna do on a test or whether they’re gonna be able to pass a class or whether they’ll be able to understand what you’re saying in your lessons, for instance. And so the anxiety component really gets at fear of something that’s unknown, but related to mathematics situations.

Dan Meyer (08:47):
Math is somewhere in the ceiling right now. Perhaps I might be surprised with a math situation!

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (08:52):
Yeah. yep.

Dan Meyer (08:52):
So I have this tendency to assume that every other subject that we teach has it better and easier than math does. It’s not true. I know this is not true. But I’m kind of curious here. Is math anxiety, like, part of a general just set of anxiety around schooling itself? Like, is there a reading anxiety, a writing anxiety, and does that all just flow from the same kind of fount of anxiety around schooling or situations about learning? And what makes math special in this regard? If it is its own special anxiety, for instance?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (09:27):
There are different…so some people obviously suffer from generalized anxiety. Right? And so they would, you know, feel anxious both for evaluative and non-evaluative situations. But in the research that we’ve done and that other people have done, there are differences between things like reading anxiety, math anxiety; I’ve also studied spatial and creativity anxiety. A lot of times what we’re trying to do in these studies is we measure all of the above, and we try to show that, look, math anxiety predicts math situations above and beyond these other things. So yeah, we definitely distinguish those things. And so what’s special about math is that, well, I think the symbolic nature is a big part of it. The abstract symbolic nature is just not as tangible to students. They can’t touch it. And so it doesn’t allow ’em to use their full cognitive faculties to play with it, as you might see, for instance, in science. Or it doesn’t allow people to relate math to their own interests the way you might see, for instance, in English. So maybe I hate reading novels, but I’m interested in zombies and you give me a book on zombies, well, ok, great, you’ve connected my personal assets to the topic. Whereas with math, either that’s harder to do or instructors don’t do such a good job of setting that connection up.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:46):
Also, I think, you know, I’ve heard of students being really anxious, let’s say, during a reading session, when teachers used to do—hopefully they’re still not doing it—the popcorn reading, where you just randomly call on a student to read out a sentence. Right? But you don’t really hear students or adults talking about, “Oh, no, no, no, I don’t read; I don’t mess with reading.” You know? Whereas with math, you do hear, “Oh, I’m not a math person. Oh no, no, no, don’t ask me any math questions.” And that is such a distinction.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (11:18):
Yeah. And I think a lot of that’s because it’s just so common. As an adult, to be nervous about reading is kind of an uncommon thing. So people feel a stigma around admitting that. But math is something that everyone feels like they’re inadequate in. And so there’s a lot of comfort in telling you how they’re just one of the many people who don’t like math. And that, you know, can have a lot of different consequences and outcomes. I think on the one hand, I think for a lot of kids it becomes a normalized message that if you fear math, that’s OK, join the club. Right? But we have to be careful about that, ’cause a lot of math anxiety researchers will oftentimes say, part of what leads to math anxiety is adults normalizing that it’s OK to be scared of math. So I think a lot of times adults, teachers, for instance, math teachers, they’ll tell kids, “You know, if you’re scared, that’s OK.” And so a lot of the math anxiety community says, “No, no, no, you’re not supposed to do that.” But my recent view is different. I view that as a form of validation. Because math is hard. And so telling kids, “Hey, look, it’s actually easy if you just try,” I don’t think that’s true. It’s actually just hard. And I think even if it was easy, to the kid, it feels hard! And I think something that’s not really well-studied right now in our field is the value of validating people’s math negative math experiences. We don’t want to validate that, ’cause we think that we’re gonna reinforce that. But actually, I think the opposite. I think when you validate people’s negative math experiences, it helps ’em to feel that they can handle it. They can start to take control over their own emotions.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:52):
I love that. And I, I actually, I think that’s so powerful, what you’re talking about, that validation. I taught kindergarten, and I vividly remember being in a parent-teacher conference and that parent saying, “Oh, I wasn’t a math person either,” right? Or, you know, their language and their experience with their own math schooling, their anxiety about math was actually impacting their students’ experience of math. Or the conversation that, when I would go to talk about a math assessment, let’s say, you could see the parent actually tensing up. And there was this moment of validation, that I felt like we needed to make space for that in the conversation with the parents, right?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (13:38):
Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:38):
Like, this is a real thing. And we are working on teaching students that math is something that gets to—your experience with math gets to look all sorts of different ways. And it’s OK if we, you know, make a mistake, or if we kind of only get this part, but we’ve really got that part. Or let’s talk about it; let’s write about it. So I really feel like that that validation is something that’s so missing. And instead of the validation, like you said, you see folks being like, “Oh yeah, me neither. I’m not a math person either.” Right?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (14:10):
Yeah. I think…part of the reason why people are comfortable sharing this because they’re looking for validation also. When they say, “Oh, I’m not a math person,” you know, I think they’re hoping that, you’ll say like, “Yeah, me neither,” or “Of course not, ’cause math is terrible.” Right? They’re looking for validation, not to reinforce their perspective, but to feel that it’s OK not to be a math person. And I think that’s one of the techniques that I’m trying to work on in my research right now, is to provide evidence that actually people will work harder when you validate their math experience. You don’t have to tell them a positive story per se. If your current story is “Math is hard and I’m very, very anxious; I’m scared,” then we can just validate that and help you work through that. And it actually will strengthen our relationships. Because if you’re a student and you’re struggling with math and I tell you, “Yeah, it’s hard; it’s OK to struggle with math,” that makes you feel seen. And that’s gonna lead you to want to ask me more for help, because I’m someone who understands you. And that’s a great, you know, remediation opportunity.

Dan Meyer (15:14):
A common thread that I think I’m seeing here in several answers is that math sometimes asks students to disassociate part of themselves. Where success in math oftentimes means working from an a level of abstraction with symbols, like you said, that can feel alien. Like, who am I here? And in the same way, I love that you’re proposing we validate and reassociate people with a very deeply felt part of themselves that is anxious about mathematics.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (15:44):
Yeah. I mean, I think that’s what validation’s supposed to do, right? So a lot of us, when we feel these strong emotions, we wonder, “Is this even a real thing? Are other people feeling this? Is there something wrong with me?” So we feel the emotions, but we can’t actually deal with them, because we wonder if they’re legitimate. And so when someone says, like, “Yeah, this is hard,” it crystallizes that emotion. And once something is made real, you can actually choose how you want to deal with it. Some kids are gonna deal with it by staying anxious. But some people are gonna choose to deal with it by saying, “Well, there’s nothing I can do about it now; I have to take this math test, so I’m just gonna think positive.” And that’s great. If the kid can end up saying that to themselves, that’s much more effective than me telling the kid, “Hey, you just gotta think positive. You’re gonna start the test anyway.” And so we want the kid to make meaning of their experience, and the way we do that is by crystallizing their emotions through validation.

Dan Meyer (16:36):
Yeah. I love that. And so what you’re proposing there, I think, sounds like, a solution, like a post-talk solution after students are feeling anxiety.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (16:43):
Yes.

Dan Meyer (16:43):
To validate and empathize.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (16:45):
Yes.

Dan Meyer (16:45):
And over the course of our season, we hope to explore a lot about solutions to math anxiety that are preventative, that reduce the odds of anxiety arising, through instruction and curriculum, before it arises. And I’m just wondering if you’ve seen anything that would hint at either specific or general words of wisdom you wanna share with the educators, about not just addressing it after the fact, but preventing math anxiety before it arises?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (17:14):
To be honest, at this point, I haven’t seen enough evidence for me to recommend anything concretely as an intervention for math anxiety, or an intervention to prevent its development. All I can really do here is rely a lot on the more broad cognitive-behavioral research on anxiety, which says that one of the ways we prevent people from developing anxiety is by helping them to make more positive appraisals of challenge situations. So a lot of times, when kids are challenged, they don’t know how to interpret that. “What does it mean that I’m struggling with this thing?” And so that’s where I think a lot of teachers can help students’ interpretations of that. ‘Cause if you leave kids to their own devices, they’re gonna think, “I’m struggling because I’m stupid. I’m struggling because I’m not good enough. I’m struggling because my dad is right; I’m gonna be a failure.” You know? They’re going to impose an interpretation to a challenge situation regardless. And so, as teachers, one thing we can do is we can help shape that interpretation and say, “What does it mean to struggle with math? People will say it means you’re stupid. That’s one interpretation. What’s another one? It means that your brain is working really hard to think through something. That’s another interpretation. What’s better? What do you think is more helpful?” And then, helping students to see how interpretations matter to how you ultimately feel about something. And that’s a very metacognitive way of thinking about things. So yeah, I would say that one way to prevent it is to help students to take more positive interpretations of their experience. But another way, and I think a more successful way, I think, is to give students early experiences where they feel efficacious dealing with math. One of the ways you do that, for instance, is by obviously making sure that the students understand the material—but that’s obvious; people are trying to do that. One of my favorite recommendations is to keep reassigning assignments, the same exact assignment, for, say, three weeks, back-to-back. So if in week one you do the homework assignment, you do OK, you don’t do so great, when week two you do it, you give the exact same assignment, and now the student can see like, “Wow, OK, this was much easier.” And then, week three, you give the exact same assignment; now the kid’s feeling really confident. And the reason why that’s great is because it helps kids to see that they’re growing in confidence. A lot of times kids don’t get to see that because we’re constantly throwing new assessments at them. And so they’re never seeing that growth. All they’re seeing is a new challenge, a new challenge, a new challenge. So I think we need to set up situations where they can feel that they’re growing, when we keep the assessment static. That can be a formative assessment, for instance—doesn’t have to be a summative assessment.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:55):
That feels so powerful and it feels like it really connects to that validation piece, right? We are actually helping to create a culture in our math classroom where we might struggle with something, but we keep revisiting it. And it’s not so much to reach mastery, but as Dr. Megan Franke — we talked to her about this partial understanding and about pulling on those threads of things that you do understand, so that you can build your confidence…build, not just confidence, but build your…I guess, kind of get your footing, right? You’re saying, “Well, I do understand this. I see how this works.” And if I’m revisiting an assignment, I feel like that would give me permission to like, “Hey, I don’t have to have this figured out on the first pass. You know?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (20:44):
Yes, yes. Yeah. I mean, I’m gonna give you a silly analogy, but I think it works. You know, a lot of times people will have nightmares, right? And they’ll keep having the same nightmare over and over again, right? And so one reason that we suspect this happens is because they haven’t worked through whatever that nightmare’s supposed to be about. So if, say, I’m scared of driving, I may be having the same dream about driving and crashing over and over. And we keep having these nightmares. And I think math anxiety is kind of like a waking nightmare, where you keep rehashing something because you haven’t had the chance to finally address that dragon. You know? And so if someone was having a lot of fear over driving, then one behavioral approach would be, you know, to work with a therapist to actually get behind the wheel and maybe drive around the same track over and over until you feel comfortable at that, and then the nightmares stop. Well, the same thing is true, I think, about math, math and math anxiety, is that you wanna give people these opportunities to feel confident by going back to that original experience that caused them to feel anxious, and saying, “This one assignment that we did in week three that really freaked you out, let’s try it again now in week five. How was that?” “Yeah, it wasn’t so bad. It was still kind of annoying.” “OK, we’ll we’ll come back to it.” “Now it’s week seven. Now let’s go back to that assignment. How is it now?” “That’s actually…it wasn’t that terrible.” And that gives people the opportunity to reflect on how they’ve grown past that nightmare.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (22:05):
I have to say, Dan talked about you being like a therapist. I’m like, wait, “How did you know, Dr. Ramirez? I did have this recurring dream! I did! And I had to face it. No, but I had such intense math anxiety in high school and it was debilitating. And the biggest thing for me, I thought I was the only one. I thought there was something wrong with me. I thought, “Why can’t I figure this out?” There wasn’t a conversation about “Here are some tools,” or “Here are some, some, some…”. Like, “This is OK, for you to feel scared about this or overwhelmed!”

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (22:41):
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (22:42):
You know, I think often when we talk about how widespread math anxiety is, I think a lot of folks automatically jump to high schoolers or college students avoiding math courses. But we see this in really young kids.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (22:56):
Yeah. So people are…people are just constantly making meaning of themselves, regardless of the age range. And that’s true even with young kids; they are trying to figure out who they are. Right? And so one of the things you see oftentimes with young kids is you ask ’em, “What are you good at?” And they say, “Everything!” And that’s their attempt to, you know, make meaning of themselves. But sometimes they’re not good at everything. Sometimes they actually struggle in math. And I think even early on, they have to make meaning of that. They say, “Well, I’m good at everything except math.” And how do you make sense of that? Well, why not math? “Oh, because math is terrible. It’s not for everybody. You know, it’s not something that I like.” And so, yeah, in a lot of the studies that we did early on, we basically went into these first-grade classrooms with the purpose of trying to assess whether we can actually show variability in kids’ math anxiety, even early on. In other other words, do kids even report feeling anxious about math situations? Or do they tell us that they’re great at everything? And what we found was that in fact, a good chunk of kids are, again, perfectly willing to tell you that “No, certain situations involving math make me very anxious.” Counting or addition, or doing a problem on the board. And the way we do that is by—I think there are probably more sophisticated ways that can be done, but this is the best we have at this point—is we go in there and we ask them, we show them a bunch of smiley faces and anxious faces. And we say, “I want you to tell me how you feel about these different situations that involve math.” And so we say, “If you feel kind of nervous, I want you to point to this face. If you feel very nervous, point to this face.” And we basically will read to them situations. We’ll say, “How would you feel if your teacher asked you to open up your new math textbook and you saw all the numbers inside of it?” And they’ll point to the really nervous face. So right now, those are some of the more reliable assessments for math anxiety among young kids. And that work showed us that even young kids are self-reporting math anxiety.

Dan Meyer (24:51):

Obviously this is worth our study, because we would hope people would not feel anxious in general, and especially if we have a mandated…kids are mandated to be in math classes for their entire childhood. So I see the need for this study, these studies. I’m curious: What are the consequences, though? Like what, what correlates with math anxiety? What are other reasons why we should care about math anxiety and work to remediate it?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (25:16):
Oh, sure. So it correlates with their actual math performance. It can correlate when they choose to do homework. Right? So a lot of times, the parents report having to fight with their kids over math homework a lot. And you also oftentimes see a lot of frustration over mathematics specifically. And so it can, you know, not only affect their academic ongoing outcomes, like math tests and math assignments, but it can also affect their relationship with their parents. So if every time you come home, your dad’s screaming at you because you haven’t done your math homework, and when he asks you to solve the problem in front of them, you don’t remember, ’cause you were checked out, ’cause you’re so stressed out, that’s gonna cause a really negative experience. You know, a lot of times people grow up and they still remember their dad screaming at them over the math homework. You know, it’ll affect your relationship with your teacher. So if you’re making me feel incompetent, if you’re stressing me out, you’re not the kind of person I wanna come to for help. So it can predict relational outcomes as well as academic outcomes. And down the line, of course, when it affects students’ opportunities to get into things like AP classes, it affects students standardized test performance and their choice of colleges, as well as scholarship opportunities.

Dan Meyer (26:29):
Once you show that it correlates to performance, then that opens up a whole range of other correlations that are pretty important, it sounds like. Whether that’s career options or, you know, post-secondary education and the like.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (26:40):
Yeah. And a lot of times, when people are choosing a career at college, a lot of times students will make a decision specifically based on what career has less math requirements or less math courses. So I think this finding needs to be verified further. But, there’s some studies showing that, for instance, elementary ed teachers, one factor that feeds into the decision to go into elementary ed is the math requirements are very low in elementary ed. So that can…obviously it’s not what we wanna hear, because these are our first formal math teachers, right? For our kids.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:16):
It feels so powerful, the impact that math anxiety can have, not only while you’re in, let’s say, elementary school, high middle school, high school, but then the impacts beyond that in terms of your career. And I shared this last season, when we talked about our personal math story, but I know when I was navigating the deepest part of my math anxiety, I really felt like, maybe this is a reason I can’t be an elementary school teacher. Because I was so worried that I wouldn’t be able…not that I wouldn’t understand the math for fourth grade, fifth grade, but that there was something about my ability to teach it or understand it or develop a love and passion for it that I wouldn’t be able to do. And I really had to reclaim it in my own way. But, you know, something that I think is so powerful about your research is just the applicability — not only to the field of mathematics, but folks’ everyday lives. And the way that you have talked in the past about math being a gatekeeper…I have a family member who, brilliant American Sign Language interpreter. I mean, amazing. Like a dance with her fingers. I could just watch it all day. And she actually didn’t complete the program because she couldn’t complete the math requirements. And I remember talking to her about like, “Well, have you gone to the free tutoring? Have you gone to, you know, this or that?” But it was a paralyzing fear, you know? So Dr. Ramirez, what do you wish educators understood about math anxiety? Or the research about math anxiety? Or maybe even the general public at large, what do you wish folks understood about math anxiety?

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (28:58):
Oh, I think that a lot of students, they struggle with math. And I think we wanna normalize that struggle as much as possible. We want to create a culture where it’s OK to do math slow; it’s ok to take your time. And I know that’s not possible with a lot of these requirements that a lot of math teachers have to do. But I think if we want to prevent math anxiety, we have to create opportunities to tell better stories. So that’s ultimately what I tell people is, why do people develop math anxiety? Because they had experiences that challenged their competency and they told a negative story. And so making space to reflect in math classrooms about what does it mean to go slow in math, or what does it mean to make mistakes, and then helping kids to tell better stories, I think it’s really the best thing we can do as math educators. ‘Cause you know, your job is not to be a therapist ultimately. You know, there’s only so much math teachers can do. But I think one of the most powerful things we can create is setting up students’ experiences where they feel confident, and they can tell better stories, so they can have better dreams about math.

Dan Meyer (30:06):
Really appreciate this introduction to math anxiety. It’s been a fantastic kickoff to our season. Dr. Ramirez, thank you so much for joining us.

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez (30:14):
Sure. Thank you.

Dan Meyer (30:16):
Thank you folks so much for listening to that conversation with Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at Ball State University.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:25):
Dan, OK, if not for your frantic signaling, I would’ve probably asked another 20 questions. I need to know what you thought .

Dan Meyer (30:34):
I found it interesting at all points. And especially I think I started to understand a little bit better where the anxiety comes from for some students. I got a little bit here, which is that I think math, more than other disciplines, involves alienation. Check that word. You like that? Alienation? I’m into it. I’m feeling it. It’s like…to get good at math, to be successful in math, you gotta, as a kid, lose your attachment to the world you understand. And I mean, “got to” as in like, “you are asked to” — many times, unfortunately, by curriculum and instruction. Which is to say, you’re turning things you can hold onto into numerals. Right? You’re turning the world and its patterns that you can see and touch into Xs and Ys. And I just don’t know that other disciplines deal with that as much. Maybe I’m wrong and just guilty of, you know, “grass is always greener” syndrome here. But I think that’s an experience that kids have in math. And I thought that Dr. Ramirez got at that when he’s talking about the need to validate a student’s experience of anxiety. Like, in treating anxiety, sometimes we alienate people further by just like saying, “Oh, no, no, no, it’s just like, you need to, you know, drill yourself more, practice more,” and kind of invalidate that. So this feeling of alienation, I think permeates a lot of math instruction. I’m looking forward to learning more about that with our future episodes

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (32:00):
Alienation. That’s interesting. I definitely felt, I definitely felt isolated and alone many times in my math journey, when I was having my…you know, in high school, when I was feeling like, “Clearly everyone can look at tan, sign, cosign, and that means something to them.” Right? I think it’s really interesting, because I’m thinking about the other disciplines; I’m running through them, and I’m like, even in science, which can seem abstract, so oftentimes there’s these experiments that accompany these concepts, where you’re like, “Look at this concept made real in front of you.” Right? . And so yeah, that’s really interesting.

Dan Meyer (32:39):
You’re always one step away from blowing something up! Or, you know, dissecting something that’s tangible to you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (32:46):
Yeah. That’s really interesting. I did really love how he brought up the abstract. And how, I think, even validating it…he talked so much about validation. Which to me was like, YES. If somebody just said, “Hey, it’s not only possible to have math anxiety, but it also doesn’t mean that you don’t belong here.” If somebody had said that, it would’ve literally changed the trajectory, you know? And I wonder what those conversations could look like in our classrooms, where teachers celebrate that. Like, WHOA, this is a new way to think of this. This is a new way. Asking how many, or what do you notice for this image, through a mathematical lens, or looking…we talked to Alison Hintz and Antony Smith, like mathematizing books, like looking through these lenses — it’s an invitation to step into this other world, right? But there’s not only one way to do it. And I think oftentimes it’s like that anxiety of “Am I gonna say the right thing?” or “Am I gonna notice the right thing?” Right? How do we create that space more, where there’s so many possibilities and we want kiddos to notice what they notice, right?

Dan Meyer (33:54):
You gotta become a certain kind of person to be successful in math class. I feel like is part of the implied deal. Where you’ve gotta—like how you said—say a certain thing or think about a certain thing a certain kind of way. You’re trying to become someone who is not necessarily you. Which I think is fundamentally an experience of alienation, separating you from important parts of yourself.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:19):
I will never, ever dive into mathematics on the scale and level that you have with your PhD. You understand math in a way that my brain just…I won’t get there, right? And yet I’m allowed to call myself a mathematician, with all of my deep dives in elementary math and my love of early numeracy and thinking about how we start thinking about counting and numbers. Right? It’s like, if we make more space for what mathematicians can look like, and what is your personal relationship with math…I mean, that to me feels really exciting. ‘Cause I think we both have something to offer each other.

Dan Meyer (35:03):
I think I have never found early math more interesting than when I talk to early math educators. And learn just like all the different ways that students come to understand a concept that I had thought was simple. Like addition of whole numbers. Whoa! There’s a lot of ways kids do that work, and their brains think those thoughts. And, yeah. That’s a good word there you’re offering us and our listeners.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (35:27):
Yeah. Yeah. I’m really excited about this season. I think there’s — again, there’s no way we’re gonna cover all facets of math anxiety. But I think having the chance to explore it over the course of a season is going to be really fascinating. And really, I hope, destigmatize it and open up the conversation for our listeners. And, you know, if you listeners…we wanna know what you thought of this episode. Do you have any particular questions? Do you have questions related to math anxiety? Questions related to this episode? We are in development for this season, so we’re gonna do our best to get those questions answered. You can keep in touch with us in our Facebook discussion group, Math Teacher Lounge Community, and on Twitter at MTLshow.

Dan Meyer (36:14):
Next time, we’re gonna go deeper into the causes and consequences of math anxiety.

Dr. Erin Maloney (36:20):
It’s not just the case that people who are bad at math are anxious about it. It’s actually that the anxiety itself can cause you to do worse in math. And that for me is really exciting, ’cause it means that if we can change your mindset, then we can really set you on a path with several more options available to you.

Dan Meyer (36:41):
Til next time folks,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:41):
Bye.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dr. Gerardo Ramirez says about math

“A lot of students struggle with math, and we want to normalize that struggle as much as possible. We have to find opportunities to tell better stories and reflect on our experiences.”

– Dr. Gerardo Ramirez

Associate Professor of Educational Psychology, Ball State University

Meet the guest

Dr. Gerardo Ramirez obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, where he studied the  role of teachers and parents in shaping the math attitudes of their students, as well as reappraisal techniques to help students cope with anxiety during testing situations.

Dr. Ramirez is currently an associate professor at Ball State, where he examines the role of frustration, empathy, and cultural capital in shaping students’ success and persistence.

A man with glasses, a beard, and a receding hairline wearing a suit and tie, pictured inside a circular frame with simple graphic accents—perfect for representing math teacher resources or the math teacher lounge.
A laptop displaying a Facebook group page for "Math Teacher Lounge Community," featuring profile photos, a group banner, and geometric shapes in the image background.

About Math Teacher Lounge

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

S5-03. Cultivating a joy of learning with Sesame Workshop

A blue graphic with text reading "Math Teacher Lounge" in multicolored letters and "Amplify." at the bottom, with abstract geometric shapes and lines as decoration.

Listen as we chat with Dr. Rosemarie Truglio, senior vice president of curriculum and content for Sesame Workshop! Continuing our theme of math anxiety this season, we sat down with Dr. Truglio to chat about Sesame Street and her thoughts on how to spread a growth mindset to young children and put them on course to academic achievement and long-term success.
 
Listen today and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!

Download Transcript

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (00:00):
Children don’t come with this math anxiety. Math anxiety is learned.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:07):
Welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge. I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson.

Dan Meyer (00:11):
And I’m Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:12):
Hello, Dan Meyer.

Dan Meyer (00:14):
Great to see you, Bethany. We are on episode three. Can you believe it?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:18):
So, I feel like we’ve just started scratching the surface about math anxiety. We’ve talked to two amazing researchers. We’ve talked about what math anxiety is, how it’s often screened for some of the causes, some of the consequences … I mean, we’ve had some good conversations. Dan, what do you think?

Dan Meyer (00:38):
Definitely, I think that the consequences have only grown more dire in my head. I’m not sure how you feel about the consequences. But, you know, it is enough for me that we ask students to take mathematics for much of their childhoods, to worry about their anxiety, taking that. But to hear about from these researchers about all the different things that correlate with math achievement and math anxiety—talking about future careers, certainly, but even some other, more serious lifelong concerns? That gives me a lot of motivation to continue this study of math anxiety here with you on the show.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:14):
It is really widespread. It has a big impact, not only on students, but on parents, on educators. You know, it’s—

Dan Meyer (01:23):
Multi-generational.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:25):
Yes. And you know, so often when folks think of math anxiety, what I hear them say is, “Oh, yeah, in high school is when math really ramps up. That’s when anxiety starts.” But we know that it starts in our youngest learners. And our research has already backed that up. We know it. I’ve seen it in my classroom. You may have seen it with some students you work with. And let me tell you, it starts young.

Dan Meyer (01:52):
It does start early. Right now, I have a son that’s just started kindergarten, and he seems relatively math-positive, but we’ve known from our interviews on this show and other kinds of experiences that oftentimes, that feeling —that math is for me, and I am for math, and we are all friends — can turn on a single moment. It seems like one teacher says a thing that changes a student’s perception of themselves as a mathematician or of math itself. So I keep waiting with bated breath, hoping not to find that one moment that changes our current open posture towards mathematics. So now it’s time to really dive into some strategies for combating math anxiety.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:34):
To help us out, we’ve called on a pretty exciting guest. I am so excited, Dan Meyer! We are being joined by Dr. Rosemarie Truglio. She is Senior Vice President of Curriculum and Content at Sesame Workshop. Sesame Workshop! As in, “Tell me how to get to Sesame Street.” Dan, I have to tell you, I spent many, many hours of my childhood watching Sesame Street. I have to ask, do you have happy Sesame Street memories? Is this part of your formation, Dan Meyer?

Dan Meyer (03:08):
At this point? In my advancing years, and the brain cells that I have left, Sesame Street is really kind of just a vibe in my head. But that vibe is such a pleasant one. One in which like nothing bad could happen. One in which learning is common and normalized and fun. And you just kind of feel at home, constantly.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:33):
I don’t know about the “just the vibe” part, because for me, it is visceral. I’m there. I am actually … I mean, I might still be there.

Dan Meyer (03:42):
You could reenact some of the skits?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:44):
. You didn’t watch Sesame Street with your kiddos when they were younger?

Dan Meyer (03:49):
We watched a lot of Elmo. A lot of Elmo. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:52):
Next-generation Sesame Street. Well, I think it’s so perfect that we’re gonna be talking about what Sesame Workshop does to help combat math anxiety and create a positive connection and relationship with mathematics. So I’m really excited to hear what Dr. Truglio and her team have been working on. And here’s our conversation with Dr. Truglio.

Dan Meyer (04:15):
Welcome to the show, Dr. Truglio. It is an honor.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (04:18):
Great to be here. Thank you for inviting me.

Dan Meyer (04:20):
You are Senior Vice President of Curriculum and Content at Sesame Workshop, which definitely sounds like the coolest job in the world to both four-year-old me and also Now me. Would you just help us help us with some backstory of how you ended up here, and what you do at Sesame Workshop?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (04:38):
Sure. It is a pretty cool job. And I am very fortunate that I’ve been in this position for the past 26 years. So, I am a developmental psychologist, and my job is to help Sesame Workshop identify curriculum needs, so that we could address them in the content that we create on the show and across our various platforms. So, Sesame Street is currently in its 53rd season. And we just, wrapped production for the 54th season, which we’ll debut next fall. And Sesame Street began with an experiment: Can television actually teach children school readiness skills, to have them better prepared for school? Especially those children who did not have access to formal education during the preschool years? And it is what we call a whole-child curriculum, because we’re dealing with all of the school readiness needs. So that that includes the academic needs, their social-emotional needs, and their health needs, as well as what we call these cognitive processing skills—how children learn content. Right? So it’s not just content skills, but how you approach learning and how you actually learn content. So as a grad student, I was fortunate to work at the Center for Research on the Influences of Television on Children. Very special center. It was at the University of Kansas. And my advisors, developmental psychologists, they studied the effects of television on children, both the positive effects and the negative effects. And so part of their research was to actually look at the longterm educational effects of Sesame Street. So I was working with Sesame Street content as a grad student, and then came to New York City. My first job was Assistant Professor at Teachers College, Columbia University. And when this position became available, Director of Research at the time, it was called, I took that job. And so my job was to oversee both the curriculum and the implementation of the curriculum, as well as the research. Because what we know, our co-founder, Joan Ganz Cooney has always said, for Sesame Street to be a successful educational program, production has to work closely with early childhood educators. They are the ones who know the curriculum and, and develop the curriculum goals, as well as the developmental psychologists who actually study how children are paying attention to the content. But more importantly, what are they comprehending from the content? And we all have to work together. Because even though we are the experts, the real experts are the children themselves. So nothing is deemed final until we actually show the children and see what they are learning from the content that we are producing.

Dan Meyer (07:54):
Are you referring to like, test audiences of kids then?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (07:57):
Yeah, I guess you could call it test audiences. I mean, I don’t. I don’t like to call it that because I see them as co-collaborators. I don’t see them as a test audience. Because, as I said, they’re the experts. It’s a collaboration. I mean, they’re the experts. And so I wanna know—

Dan Meyer (08:12):
As collaborators. I got it now. Yeah.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (08:14):
They help us. So that’s exactly what we tell the children too. So it’s called formative research. You know, we, we do what we call, um, storybook testing, an animated version of a storybook to have some little movement and see are they finding the story engaging, but more importantly, are they picking up on the intended educational lesson that we’re trying to teach in the story. So they are co-collaborators. they’re the ones who are helping us get the story just right for them.

Dan Meyer (08:46):
That’s really exciting, and makes me think about what classes might be like if students were regarded in that kind of lens as well. I just wanna say that my four-year-old self is on this interview as well, and is re-contextualizing all the stuff I saw as a kid. And it just felt like, at the time, you folks turned the camera on and went down to the street and we just had this real natural time. And it’s great to hear about all the intense preparation and co-construction at work and work that went into that time. Yeah,

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (09:12):
It’s about a year preparation from start to finish. From the start of identifying, “What is the educational need? Is it an academic need? Is it a social-emotional need? Is it a health need? Is it a cognitive-processing need?” And then once we have the need identified, we have what we call a curriculum seminar. We bring in the experts who are studying this topic with preschoolers, because we wanna get it, we wanna get it right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:41):
Which, by the way, little behind the scenes: How often do you get to go to set?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (09:46):
So we’re in a production probably about six weeks out of the year. Covid really messed things up. ‘Cause we have to be really—we have very strict Covid protocols, but there is someone on my team—and sometimes we have to, you know, rotate for availability—but there’s always an educator on set.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:06):
Awesome.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (10:07):
Because even though you stick to the script, questions arise; they wanna make changes; sometimes they have to cut; things are running too long and they have to cut and we gotta figure out where to cut. So there’s always an educator on set.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:19):
But sometimes you go and have lunch, like—.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (10:21):
Oh, I go, yes. Sometimes I go—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:23):
And just hang out with Big Bird, right?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (10:24):
Sometimes I go hang out with Big Bird. No, those are my friends!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:27):
They are!

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (10:28):
No, no, I go hang out with them. They’re my friends. Yes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:32):
When I think about Sesame Street and I think about … like, I can’t help but smile. Because I think I have such fond memories of the characters. I mean, we invited them, my mom invited them, into our home, right? And, you know, now I have a two-year-old and there’s no doubt that I’m gonna introduce him to Sesame Street. And I see how it really does feel like the folks who are doing this work, you and your team, you have a deep respect for children. So it makes sense that you call your test collaborators “collaborators,” right? They’re a part of it. And you know, I love that. And Sesame Street makes me smile. However, I’m like, we’re talking about math anxiety. And it’s so interesting, because as Dan and I were talking about our memories of Sesame Street … you know, it’s like Sesame Street feels like there’s not much anxiety. I mean, there are problems, and there’s problem solving, and it’s not like everything is perfect. But we figure it out. And it’s OK to make mistakes and it’s OK to try again. And a lot of times, we don’t see that in the math classroom—or at least, how folks talk about math. So, how do you all think about anxiety, about how to prevent it? Like, when you’re doing your work, you know that math anxiety is a real thing. But then that’s not translated in these experiences and the relationships with math that you’re building with your viewers.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (12:07):
Yeah, that’s a really good question, because it’s really easy, because our core audience are two- to four-year-olds and they love math. And what’s not to love, right? Because they are figuring the world out as they’re exploring the world. So you said something really interesting, that when you turn on the TV—when you turned on the TV when you were a child, and now you’re a mom of a two-year-old, we wanna make sure that the show represents content that is relevant and meaningful to our target audience. And that comes through with the characters. So all of our characters have very specific personalities, as all children do. And our characters represent all children, in terms of not only personality, but interest and learning styles, ’cause we wanna see—we wanna make sure that children see themselves in these characters. And we have a character who actually loves math. And he’s The Count.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:12):
I’m like, “I know! I know who it is!” I will save you my impression. Although I have done it for my child. But I’ll save our listeners .

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (13:20):
And you know, he’s an adult character. Some of our characters are preschoolers, like Elmo and Abby—they’re preschoolers—and Zoe. But The Count is an adult. He lives in the castle and he just loves numbers. But what’s really important is while we have The Count to explain—not explain to, but to portray to children, cause we don’t explain anything; we show children that math is more than number, right? Math is a pretty wide concept. Which is what I love about math. And the other thing about math is math language. The language of math. ‘Cause when we’re teaching children vocabulary words, we’re also teaching children the concept. Be it a math concept or a science concept or a social-emotional concept. So children don’t come with this math anxiety. Math anxiety is learned and it’s unfortunate. It’s picked up by their observations of the adults in their lives, who sometimes say out loud, “I don’t like math,” or “Math is hard,” or even worse, “I’m not good at math.” Or may even label it as math anxiety. That word won’t mean anything to a young child. But it then provides a, whaddya call it, like a negative valence for something that they never felt negative about. Because as they’re growing and interacting with the world, math is all around them. And there’s that sense of awe and wonder and joy, especially as they’re learning and they’re figuring it out. So I think we have to reframe math. Instead of saying “math anxiety,” we have to talk about the joy of math and all the wonderful joys that come with the exploration of these math concepts. Number is great. We know kids love numbers. We know that they love to count and use a big word here: enumerate . Because so many parents don’t make this distinction. They’ll say, “Oh, my child is counting!” Well, there’s rote counting, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, which is important. But then it’s like there’s an item for each number. So it’s one Cheerio, two Cheerios. And then as you point to each number, you are then figuring out what the set is, of the number of objects that you have. And then you get at what I love to call the meaningfulness of math. Right? Number has meaning. And as I said, it’s all part of your everyday activities. It’s part of—it’s in your kitchen; you’re following recipes; you’re measuring; you’re weighing. It’s at bath time, right? You could have the sorting of nested cups and you could, you know, and once again, the math language: big, bigger, biggest. These are relational concepts. You could then count what sinks and what floats, if you’re doing science. And then you could put them in two different buckets, and count. These are the items that sunk and these are the items that float. So math and bath time could be a lot of fun. And then there’s math and music. Music is so rich with math, as you talk about rhythm and tempo and dynamics and pitch and duration. That’s all math.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:57):
The way that you talk about it, it is so rich, right? It is so multi-layered. And you know, I’ve shared on the podcast before: I’ve actually had parents in parent-teacher conferences say that, “Well, I wasn’t good at math either,” or “Math’s really not my thing.” And it’s really—it is, it’s rooted in that fear. And so I do see the way that you’re talking about it; I see that come through in Sesame Street. That, in a lot of ways, it’s reeducating parents, right? Because we hope that our caregivers are sitting next to their kiddo and enjoying it together and having conversations about it later. And there’s a way that parents then are also getting their own sense of what math can be, expanded. And I think there’s such a beauty in that. And I love the way that you talk about that, that you really are looking at, “Well, we wanna celebrate counting and the joyfulness of that. And let’s use math talk, you know, and let’s use these words and try out these ideas.” And it’s not because you’re trying to check some list. But you’re really exploring it and having fun together.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (18:03):
And you’re embracing it. And you mentioned the word “mistake.” So often when it comes to math, if you make a mistake—you make a mistake in counting or, you know, we’re not doing a lot of math equations on Sesame Street, but that’s when people feel like they can’t do math. ‘Cause they made a mistake. And that’s something that we are trying to address on Sesame Street, that it’s OK to make mistakes and you learn through mistakes. But you have to have—and I’m gonna come up with this other phrase now—you have to have what we call a growth mindset. What that means is that I may not be able to do this yet. Like, it’s called “the power of yet.” So we know that learning any concept, it takes time and practice. And how do we have children embrace the process, right? So often we focus on right and wrong. Now, there is right and wrong with math, of course. You know, there’s a right answer and there’s a wrong answer. But how do we focus, not on the end product, but the process through which you are engaging in? So let’s talk about measurement. Let’s talk about measuring the length and the width or the height of something. You might make some mistakes along the way, but you’re processing it. My son used to make all of these little structures for all his little play animals. Well, you know, he would measure and think he got it right. And then when he put the animals in, of course, you know, either the animal was too wide or it was too tall. And he would have to redo it. But you’re not redoing it from scratch, you’re redoing it now from experience. “I realize that if I’m gonna put the giraffe in with the elephant, I’m gonna need something wide as well as high.” Right? For the length, tall. And that’s process. And then, for children, when they figure it out, that “oops” and “aha”—the “aha” was like, “I did it!” And it’s so empowering, you know, giving them agency—not swooping in and saying, “All right, I’ll fix it for you. You know, we got the wide elephant and the tall giraffe and I’ll you know…”. NO! Having them do it. And another fun activity is in what we call informal measurement. And that’s like getting something of an equal size. It could be paper clips or it could be same-size blocks, and then measuring how long something is. So if it’s measured by blocks versus paperclips, you’re gonna have a lot more paperclips than you are blocks. And that kind of comparison is so fascinating for children. And so that’s measurement. And now we have counting. Like, how many paperclips long is something versus how many blocks long is something.

Dan Meyer (21:02):
So checking my understanding here, you’ve talked about how caregivers and other adults can transmit math anxiety by naming it and claiming it for themselves. And you’ve talked about, some really exciting ways that adults can involve students and kids in different kinds of math. I’d love to go upstream with you a little bit and wonder out loud, where does this anxiety come from initially? It’s gotta be more than adult one to kid two talking about anxiety, and transmitting it from human to human. What is the original spring from which all this anxiety flows?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (21:36):
Yeah. I do think it does—a lot of it does come from the adults in their lives. It’s unfortunate, because there is a lot of math talk about it, right? I can’t do math; I’m not good at math. Even when you’re at a restaurant and you get the bill and someone’s figuring out the tip, I can’t tell you how often it’s like, “Pass the bill, because I can’t do math.” Or if you actually then bring gender into it, you know, “Oh, girls aren’t good at math,” and that’s not true. There’s no evidence of that whatsoever, right? So in the younger grades, there’s no gender difference in terms of math ability. What’s also interesting about even socioeconomic status differences, you don’t see a lot of differences between low-income and middle-income children when it comes to math skills. Where you see differences is children’s ability to talk about their mathematical thinking. So if a child doing a math problem is asked, “How did you solve the problem?”, low-income children don’t often have the language to explain their thinking. So that’s something that we did on Sesame Street, where we focused a lot on what we call math talk. So, not just show number and show doing math, but actually narrate and giving the language. Because math literacy is one of the predictors of overall school achievement. So there’s that. They’re getting it from the adults in their lives. They’re getting it, unfortunately, sometimes from their teachers. But I think the anxiety comes from the fear of making mistakes. Because math, there is right and wrong, and always wanting to get the right answer. So that’s why this whole idea of reframing, and saying, “But really, it’s in the process.” So, you know, my son, math is not his strong suit. And I’ve been doing a lot of growth mindset with him as well. And there was a teacher that he had—I think in like 10th or 11th grade—who said, “In a test, I don’t wanna—I’m not even gonna look at the answer. I wanna see the process through which you GOT to this answer. And I’m going to grade the process. So the process could yield a right answer; it could yield a wrong answer. But you’re gonna get graded on the process. Because I wanna see how you are approaching the problem and how you’re thinking it through.” And I think that is a great example of, maybe, to try to reduce math anxiety. Because if you can get people excited about the process through which you’re learning—and that applies to all subjects, it’s not just math!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:36):
I’m like, that applies to life! Right?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (24:38):
That applies to life!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:39):
That’s so spot on. Wow. Yeah.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (24:41):
But I think that there’s so much focus on right and wrong, and not really understanding the value of the process. So on Sesame, we’ve been doing a lot of “oops” and “ahas.” You know, we’re gonna make mistakes, but what’s important is what do you DO when you make a mistake? So there’s a great episode with The Count. A couple of years ago. The Count was counting. Something he does every day. A lot of time, every day, ’cause he’s obsessed with counting and numbers. And he was counting an array of items.

Gladys the Cow (25:17):
I need 10 sandwiches all together.

The Count (25:22):
Well, of course.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (25:23):
And he made a mistake.

Elmo (25:25):
The Count?

The Count (25:25):
Hmm?

The Count (25:25):
Elmo thinks The Count made a little mistake.

The Count (25:31):
No mistake.

The Count (25:32):
Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (25:33):
And first time ever, did he make a mistake. And he fell apart.

The Count (25:38):
I must make sure that that never happens again. So I shall never count again.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (25:46):
And that’s an example of showing that, you know, you could get upset when you make a mistake, but what’s important is you gotta come back and you gotta come back to doing what you love. In his case, is counting and letting him know that it was an “oops.” But you learn that mistakes are OK. It’s OK to make a mistake and continue to do what you love.

The Count (26:13):
I must keep trying and you should, too.

Elmo (26:17):
Yeah!

The Count (26:17):
So come, let’s count the carrots together!

Elmo (26:18):
Oh, cool!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:19):
And what a beautiful gift to show kiddos. Show that to kiddos, right? And to the adults. I wanna, you know, really acknowledge it, and say, “Hey look this, it’s OK.” And again, you’re giving them that language. That’s such a gift.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (26:34):
Thank you.

Dan Meyer (26:34):
We spend a lot of time wondering why other subjects don’t seem to suffer from this negative perception. And I think you’ve unlocked a lot of that. You’ve mentioned that there are issues that cut across different subject areas, but I think from my own experience and research and interviews, it seems that in ELA and the social sciences, there’s this aspect where you need to come up with a claim and “how are you seeing this?” And there are multiple defensible claims. And I love how you imported that generous pedagogy over into math with this example of a teacher who says, “You know what? It’s about the process here.” Disassociating answer and process.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (27:09):
And I think the other thing is like, when children are engaged in a project, for parents to point out: “You’re doing math!” Because they don’t realize that they’re doing math. Once again, math is so often equated solely with numbers and mathematical computations. So it was really interesting—the same is true for science. You know, when we’re talking to parents about the use of everyday—like, going to the supermarket or making dinner or bath time, there’s so much math and science in the everyday. And then when you point it out to them—”you’re doing math”—it’s like, “I’m doing math!” Like, you’re setting the table for a family of six: you’re doing math. That’s called one one-to-one correspondence. “I’m doing math: I’m setting the table.” Yeah, but you’re doing math. You can’t set the table because you have to know how many people are gonna be sitting at the table for dinner. You can’t follow a recipe without doing math. You can’t go shopping without doing math. There’s quantity; you gotta figure out how many peppers you gotta buy, or pounds. “I gotta get a bunch of potatoes and I gotta put ’em in the scale. And I have to get two pounds of potatoes.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (28:29):
So your book Ready for School: A Parent’s Guide to Playful Learning for Children Ages Two to Five. First, as a parent of a young toddler, I gotta say it’s such a tool; it’s such a resource. It’s very conversational. And I think about these ideas a lot, both in my work and, you know, just for fun. And yet, even if this wasn’t my chosen field, I still feel like it’s just so accessible. And I wanna flag something.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (29:01):
Thank you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:01):
Yeah, no. Thank YOU. . I wanna flag something that you said in the math chapter You were talking about the joy of math, and you said when it comes to our children, caregivers: “take pleasure in reading stories together, especially at bedtime, which in many households is a regular part of a child’s routine. But somehow the notion of introducing math concepts to our children seems daunting. In fact, some studies have shown that parents harbor a strong belief that while it’s important and pleasurable to support their child’s reading skills, it’s the responsibility of the schools to take care of teaching math.” And that quote, I highlighted it, I starred it! And I would love for you to say a little more about that, because you have given us already, like, a bounty of ideas that as caregivers we can do with our kiddos or the kiddos in our lives. And we’ve seen that even what they’re learning in school, it may not be the freeing, joyful math language that we hope our kiddos have access to.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (30:05):
Yeah, I’m glad you brought that up. Because a lot of our focus is on how children learn through playful experiences, and how they learn through play in particular. And there are so many playing, either a game or even playing ideas—like we talked about building, you know, a house for animals or building a fort. It’s just so filled with math. And I wish I could narrate for every young parent how I would hope that they would talk as they are co-engaged in this activity. And I think … we asked about, with the anxiety, the adults have to find the joy in math first. They have to see the math. That’s the problem. That’s why I hope that my book provides that. I want you to know that you are doing math and I want you to know that your child is what we call a mathematician—or in the science chapter, is a STEMist. Your child is already doing science, technology, engineering, and math. STEM is so integrated. So to acknowledge them—because babies are doing math! Babies know, they can distinguish between a small quantity and something that is a of a larger quantity and want the larger. Right? So, it’s natural for them. And they are taking it all in. I mean, the joy of watching a child just early counting: you know, one, two. And trying to then figure out the meaningfulness of two. It’s not three objects. There are actually two. And for a parent to see the joy in that I think is step one. And then to see the richness and how expansive math is, and that power of, oops, “I made a mistake, don’t freak out,” and then [not] say, “See, I’m not good at math,” but say, “Let me try again. I know I could figure this out.” Right? It’s all of that supportive language and supportive experiences that builds this mindset, a positive mindset. So that you hope that when you get into the higher grades, they’re not walking in and saying, “I can’t, I can’t do math.”

Dan Meyer (32:26):
Yeah. Super helpful. I think you point at one of the grownups—great powers in the world of kids, which is to label. To name things. And you know, you’ve talked about how grownups should ideally downplay some of their negative experiences with mathematics for the sake of the kid, but also to play up the positive stuff that they’re doing as mathematics. Like that right there, that’s math. I would love to know … you have an extremely loud megaphone to communicate messages about math and the world and everything through Sesame Street. One of the biggest that there is—and I just wonder if you could step out and imagine you had a magic wand to wave over the world in which students grow up, play and learn—what would you do like to help students have better associations or less math anxiety? And, you know, learn more about math itself?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (33:19):
If I had a magic wand, I would give everyone what we call a growth mindset that nothing is fixed and everything can be changed if you put the time and effort into the process, and enjoy the process. The joy of learning. I think, you know, it’s really sad. I don’t wanna be sad on your show. But when we were getting ready for the 50th anniversary, I was wondering, “What is gonna be the curriculum focus?” You know, we just came off of literacy and math literacy and social-emotional development. And we talked about the power of play. Playful learning. And building careers. Give children sophisticated play scenarios so that they could explore what they may wanna be when they grow up. Because there’s a concept: If I can see it, I can play it, I can be it. Right? So where are those portrayals? And it’s like, “What are we gonna do for the 50th?” And I had a convening of experts across all disciplines, and brought them into a room. And I said, you know, “What keeps you up at night? Like, what are you worried about?” Sort of like the State of the Union of Child Development. And this is where the sad part is. They talked about how that sense of joy, that sense of wonder, that sense of curiosity, that sense of flexible thinking and creative thinking, was disappearing in early childhood. Wow. If it’s disappearing in early childhood, we are in big, big trouble . ‘Cause I could see it disappearing later on, you know, as you advance in grade. But what do you mean, it’s disappearing in childhood? And then they talked about the fear of making mistakes. And that goes against—it’s the opposite of a growth mindset. And so we have to bring back that sense of joy, wonder, asking those why questions and embracing them. So it’s another problem parents have. They’re fine with the “why” questions until the “whys” become so difficult they don’t have the answers. And then they don’t want the “why” questions, because now they feel like they’re not smart enough to answer their child’s “why” questions. How do I flip that around to be much more positive and say, “You know, I don’t know! But let’s find out together. Let’s explore together; let’s experiment together.” That’s what I mean about the shift in the mindset, that growth mindset. We should not know all of the answers, but where’s the joy of, “Wow, I don’t know, let’s go find out together”? And that applies to math too. But you have to have that open mindset. You have to—you, as yourself, have to have that growth mindset.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:20):
I love that magic wand. I want that magic wand! And I think what—like Dan said about this megaphone, this opportunity to reach so many young people, so many caregivers—what a gift! And I’m so grateful that you took time to be in the lounge with us, and that you have shared these ideas. Because truly, I think, like you said, it’s really our youngest learners, right? How can we create and cultivate these opportunities for our youngest learners to find the joy in mathematics and just in learning, right?

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (36:54):
Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:55):
So thank you. Thank you so much, Dr. Truglio. We are deeply grateful for your insight and for all the work you do. And we continue to invite the world of Sesame Street into our homes.

Dr. Rosemarie Truglio (37:08):
Thank you. Thank you for allowing us to come into your home, and for you to re-learn with your child as you’re watching Sesame Street. Because it’s very much a parenting show, as it is for a child-directed show, because we are blessed to have these wonderful human cast members who are the stand-ins for parents. And so we are often giving you the language for how to talk about and how to problem-solve together. So thank you.

Dan Meyer (37:43):
Thanks so much for listening to our conversation with Dr. Rosemarie Truglio, Senior Vice President of Curriculum and Content at Sesame Workshop.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (37:51):
Dr. Truglio is also the author of Sesame Street Ready for School, A Parents Guide to Playful Learning for Children Ages Two to Five, and we’re gonna make sure we put a link to that in the show notes because it is really, really a rich resource. I’m diving in. I have so many ideas bookmarked that I wanna try out with my kiddo.

Dan Meyer (38:09):
Yeah, it’s really exciting to see—like, for a classroom educator, I just kinda assumed that a lot of math learning happens in the classroom context. That’s my lens. So yeah, I loved reading the book and seeing all the different opportunities for parents for just out there in the world, in front of your house, at the supermarket. All the different opportunities there are for mathematical thinking, and then to think about how to bring that into some of those routines and ideas into the classroom, into formal schooling.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (38:35):
Exactly. Exactly. Like Dr. Truglio said, the caregivers’s disposition about mathematics matters so deeply. Your teachers’ dispositions about mathematics, their beliefs, the way that you hear people talking about math, that impacts our learners. That impacts—like, as a student, that impacts what you think is possible for yourself. So I love this, re-educating ourselves about what math can look like out in the world, in everyday conversations. I don’t know. I really, really appreciated this conversation with Dr. Truglio.

Dan Meyer (39:12):
Same. Yeah. We’d love to hear what you folks think about the work. the book, her ideas. Definitely get in touch with us. Subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge, wherever you get podcasts. And keep in touch with us on Facebook at Math Teacher Lounge Community, and on Twitter at MTL show.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:27):
Also, if you haven’t already, please subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge wherever you get your podcast. And if you like what you’re hearing, please leave us a rating and a review. It’ll help more listeners find the show. And while you’re at it, let a friend know about this episode, because you enjoyed it; they might enjoy it. On our next episode, we’re gonna be chatting with Dr. Heidi Sabnani and taking a closer look at best practices for coaching teachers to reduce their own math anxiety.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (39:56):
One of the teachers that I worked with had done her student teaching with a teacher who had math anxiety and who never taught math. And so she entered her teaching career never having taught math before or seeing it taught.

Dan Meyer (40:10):
Thanks again for listening, folks.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:12):
Bye.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dr. Rosemarie Truglio says about math

“We all have to work together, because even though we are the experts [on curriculum and education], the real experts are the children themselves.”

– Dr. Rosemarie Truglio

Senior Vice President of Curriculum and Content, Sesame Workshop

Meet the guest

Rosemarie T. Truglio, Ph.D. is the Senior Vice President of Curriculum and Content at Sesame Workshop. Dr. Truglio is responsible for the development of the interdisciplinary curriculum on which Sesame Street is based and oversees content development across platforms (e.g., television, publishing, toys, home video, and theme park activities).  She also oversees the curriculum development for all new show production, including  Bea’s Block, Mecha BuildersEsme & RoyHelpsters, and Ghostwriter. Dr. Truglio has written numerous articles in child and developmental psychology journals and presented her work at national and international conferences. Her current book is Ready for School! A Parent’s Guide to Playful Learning for Children Ages 2 to 5, published by Running Press (2019).

A person with short dark hair, wearing a dark blazer and white top, smiles at the camera against a blue background with graphic elements, evoking the inviting atmosphere of a math teacher lounge and highlighting useful math teacher resources.
A laptop displaying a Facebook group page for "Math Teacher Lounge Community," featuring profile photos, a group banner, and geometric shapes in the image background.

About Math Teacher Lounge

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Episode 9: The cognitive science behind how students learn to read with Carolyn Strom

Carolyn Strom, professor of early childhood literacy and innovation at New York University, discusses her research and interviews with pre-school teachers and how students learn to read, as well as her view on the Science of Reading and the cognitive science behind it all. She shares her insights on the importance of neuroscience and culturally responsive teaching, and dives into Linnea Ehri’s four phases of learning how to read.

Phonological awareness games

In Cut It Out, students isolate individual phonemes by listening to a beginning, middle, or ending sound and choosing a picture of the word containing the sound in that position.

Skills
Phonological awareness

  • Blending at the compound word, syllable, onset-rime, and phoneme level

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.2.C — Isolate and pronounce initial, medial vowel, and final sounds (phonemes) in spoken single-syllable words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.D — Isolate and pronounce the initial, medial vowel, and final sounds (phonemes) in three-phoneme (consonant-vowel-consonant, or CVC) words.1 (This does not include CVCs ending with /l/, /r/, or /x/.)

In Gem & Nye, students blend sounds into words, starting with compound words and syllables and then moving to beginning (onset) and ending (rime) sounds and finally individual phonemes, to identify the picture of the word the Soundbots say when blended together.

Skills
Phonological awareness

  • Blending at the compound word, syllable, onset-rime, and phoneme level

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.2.B — Orally produce single-syllable words by blending sounds (phonemes), including consonant blends.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.B — Count, pronounce, blend, and segment syllables in spoken words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.C — Blend and segment onsets and rimes of single-syllable spoken words.

In Wordbots, students practice segmenting words into their onsets and rimes to determine which Startbots and Endbots form a stimulus word.

Skills
Phonological awareness

  • Segment at the compound-word and onset-rime level

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.C — Blend and segment onsets and rimes of single-syllable spoken words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.B — Count, pronounce, blend, and segment syllables in spoken words.

In Zoom Boom, students practice rhyming by listening to a word and identifying the picture of the word that rhymes with it.

Skills
Phonological awareness

  • Rhyming

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.A — Recognize and produce rhyming words.

Phonics Games in Amplify Reading: K–2

In Curioso Crossing, students practice accurate and automatic word recognition by identifying the correct spoken word to guide their Curioso safely throughout the land.

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding; Advanced Decoding

  • Read high-frequency irregular words, regular words, words with inflected endings, two-syllable words, words with prefixes and suffixes, and multi-syllable words

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.B — Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.C — Know final -e and common vowel team conventions for representing long vowel sounds.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.E — Decode two-syllable words following basic patterns by breaking the words into syllables.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.F — Read words with inflectional endings.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.A — Distinguish long and short vowels when reading regularly spelled one-syllable words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.C — Decode regularly spelled two-syllable words with long vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.D — Decode words with common prefixes and suffixes.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.F — Recognize and read grade-appropriate irregularly spelled words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.C — Read common high-frequency words by sight (e.g., the, of, to, you, she, my, is, are, do, does).
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.G — Recognize and read grade-appropriate irregularly spelled words.

In Food Truck, students practice “chopping” blends, ending sounds (rimes), and whole words into beginning sounds (onsets), ending sounds, and individual letters to create orders for their hungry goblin customers. The difficulty of words and segmenting tasks increases with each level as customers order more sophisticated “dishes.”

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding

  • Decode and spell words with common rime families

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.D — Distinguish between similarly spelled words by identifying the sounds of the letters that differ.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.E — Add or substitute individual sounds (phonemes) in simple, one-syllable words to make new words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.B — Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.

In Grumpy Goblins, students learn sound-spelling correspondences for consonant digraphs and vowel teams by listening to a sound from a goblin and feeding it the piece of toast with the corresponding letter or combination.

Skills
Phonics – Letter Combinations

  • Sound-spelling correspondences for consonant digraphs and vowel teams

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.A — Know the spelling-sound correspondences for common consonant digraphs.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.B — Know spelling-sound correspondences for additional common vowel teams.

In Hangry Goblins, students practice letter-sound combinations by feeding individual letter sounds, consonant digraphs, blends, and vowel teams to goblins that become more and more “hangry” until they are given the letters that match their demands.

Skills
Phonics – Letter Sound Correspondence

  • Sound-spelling correspondences for individual letters and letter combinations

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.A — Know the spelling-sound correspondences for common consonant digraphs.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3.B — Know spelling-sound correspondences for additional common vowel teams.

In Picky Goblins, students practice sound-spelling correspondences for individual letters by listening to a sound from a goblin and feeding it the piece of toast with the corresponding.

Skills
Phonics – Letter-Sound Correspondence

  • Sound-Spelling Correspondences for single letters

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.

In Read All About It, students practice reading sentences with words that include the sound-spelling correspondences, word features (e.g., prefixes/suffixes), and phonics rules (e.g., vowel consonant long e, syllable patterns) they learned and practiced in other games.

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding; Advanced Decoding

  • Read grade level text accurately

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3 — Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.4 — Read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3 — Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.4 — Read with sufficient accuracy and fluency to support comprehension.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.3 — Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.2.4 — Read with sufficient accuracy and fluency to support comprehension.

In Rhyme Time, students practice with different rime families (words that end with the same sounds and rhyme) and decode words in these families by swapping the first letter sounds of words while the ending sounds remain constant.

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding

  • Decode words with common rime families

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.D — Distinguish between similarly spelled words by identifying the sounds of the letters that differ.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.E — Add or substitute individual sounds (phonemes) in simple, one-syllable words to make new words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.B — Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.

In Tongue Twist, students practice with different rime families (words that end with the same sounds and rhyme) and build words by changing the ending sound (rime) while the beginning (onset) sounds, consonant blends, and consonant digraphs remain constant.

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding

  • Decode words with common rime families

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.B — Associate the long and short sounds with the common spellings (graphemes) for the five major vowels.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.3.D — Distinguish between similarly spelled words by identifying the sounds of the letters that differ.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.K.2.E — Add or substitute individual sounds (phonemes) in simple, one-syllable words to make new words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3.B — Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.

In Word City, students identify and manipulate beginning, middle, and ending letter sounds to assemble word chains that form buildings.

Skills
Phonics – Early Decoding

  • Letter-sound correspondence
  • Decoding and spelling regular words

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACYRF.K.3.A — Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACYRF.1.3.A — Know the spelling-sound correspondences for common consonant digraphs.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACYRF.1.3.B — Decode regularly spelled one-syllable words.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACYRF.1.3.C — Know final -e and common vowel team conventions for representing long vowel sounds.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACYRF.2.3.B — Know spelling-sound correspondences for additional common vowel teams.

Microcomprehension Games in Amplify Reading: K–2

In Because This, That, students learn how common text structures give clues to meaning by rearranging sentences to identify cause and effect or problem and solution.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Text Structure: Organize sentences using sequence/chronological order

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.3 — Describe the connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or pieces of information in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.8 — Identify the reasons an author gives to support points in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.3 — Describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.8 — Describe how reasons support specific points the author makes in a text.

In Connect It!, students practice using different types of conjunctions (temporal and causal, for example) to combine two clauses into a coherent sentence.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Syntactic awareness – connectives

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.3 — Use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening.

In Message in a Bottle, students build their awareness of syntax and the impact word order has on meaning by unscrambling scraps of lost messages to reconstruct sentences.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Syntactic awareness

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.1 — Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.1 — Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.

In Mind the Gap, comprehension levels are assessed through a modified cloze exercise in which students make selections to fill in the blanks of a text where approximately every seventh word has been omitted.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Reading fluency
  • Syntactic awareness
  • Inference
  • Comprehension monitoring

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.1 — Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.10 — Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.

In Show Off, students learn how common text structures give clues to meaning, using cues from illustrations to rearrange sentences in the correct sequential or chronological order.
Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Text structure: Organize sentences using problem/solution and cause/effect

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.3 — Describe the connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or pieces of information in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.8 — Identify the reasons an author gives to support points in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.3 — Describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.8 — Describe how reasons support specific points the author makes in a text.knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary sound or many of the most frequent sounds for each consonant.

In Sloppy Scrolls, students practice the art of comprehension monitoring, or ensuring that they continually build and check a mental model of what they read. In the game, students are introduced to a world of enchanted scrolls that have lost their magic: they contain inconsistencies, and no longer make sense. The students must attempt to identify the inconsistencies by tapping the sentences that don’t match the rest of the passage. To increase the challenge of the game, some of the passages are presented without errors.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Comprehension Monitoring

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.10 — By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories and poetry, in the grades 2-3 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

In Storyboard, students practice making inferences by completing a storyboard that integrates relevant background knowledge missing from a given sentence.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Inference

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.K.1 — With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.K.1 — With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.1.1 — Ask and answer questions about key details in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.1 — Ask and answer questions about key details in a text.

In Super Match, students work on developing cognitive flexibility, or the ability to track multiple elements simultaneously, by completing interactive puzzles that associate pictures and words across multiple dimensions (e.g., color and category, or starting sounds and category).

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Cognitive flexibility

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.5.A — Sort words into categories (e.g., colors, clothing) to gain a sense of the concepts the categories represent.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.5.B — Define words by category and by one or more key attributes (e.g., a duck is a bird that swims; a tiger is a large cat with stripes).
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RF.1.3 — Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words.

In Unmask That, students build their understanding of anaphora, a tool authors use to avoid repetition, by linking pronouns to their antecedents in text.

Skills
Microcomprehension

  • Syntactic awareness – anaphora

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.1 — Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.1 — Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.

Comprehension Games in Amplify Reading: K–2

In Best Buddy, students examine character traits to determine which school club provides the best fit for their fictional friends.

Skills
Comprehension – Key Ideas and Details

  • Character Traits

Standards Covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.1.3 — Describe characters, settings, and major events in a story, using key details.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.3 — Describe how characters in a story respond to major events and challenges.

In Book Club, students compare and contrast two books on the same topic or theme to determine which book best meets the needs of a character in the game.

Skills
Comprehension – Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

  • Compare and Contrast Texts

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.9 — Identify basic similarities in and differences between two texts on the same topic (e.g., in illustrations, descriptions, or procedures).
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.Rl.2.9 — Compare and contrast the most important points presented by two texts on the same topic.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.9 — Compare and contrast two or more versions of the same story (e.g., Cinderella stories) by different authors or from different cultures.

In Debate-a-Ball, students practice identifying the best evidence to support a claim. Students pick an animal avatar to compete with an automated opponent in debates on familiar topics. To win, students must put forward the best evidence to support each claim more frequently than their opponents. They are taught to identify evidence that is factual and strongly related to the claim.

Skills
Comprehension – Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

  • Evaluate evidence

Standards covered

  • CSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.8 — Describe how reasons support specific points the author makes in a text.

In Picture This, students complete the illustrations for a story by identifying words that describe its setting, characters, problems, and solutions.

Skills
Comprehension – Key Ideas and Details

  • Story Elements/Plot

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.1.1 — Ask and answer questions about key details in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.1.3 — Describe characters, settings, and major events in a story, using key details.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.1 — Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.3 — Describe how characters in a story respond to major events and challenges.

In Storybox, students choose settings, situations, and solutions to send characters on different adventures, using details and context to help them resolve problems and complete the story.

Skills
Comprehension – Key Ideas and Details

  • Story Elements/Plot

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.K.3 — With prompting and support, identify characters, settings, and major events in a story.

In Tube Tales, students learn the attributes of different genres and practice identifying them in brief texts.

Skills
Comprehension – Craft and Structure

  • Text schema

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.2.10 — By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories and poetry, in the grades 2-3 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.5 — Know and use various text features (e.g., captions, bold print, subheadings, glossaries, indexes, electronic menus, icons) to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.10 — By the end of year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts, in the grades 2-3 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

In What’s the Big Idea, students examine pictures, picture sequences, and short passages to practice differentiating the main idea from story details.

Skills
Comprehension – Key Ideas and Details

  • Main idea

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.K.2 — With prompting and support, identify the main topic and retell key details of a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.1.2 — Identify the main topic and retell key details of a text.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.2.2 — Identify the main topic of a multiparagraph text as well as the focus of specific paragraphs within the text.

Vocabulary Games in Amplify Reading: K–2

In Punchline!, students learn how words can have multiple meanings by channeling their inner comedian to crack homonym-based jokes.

Skills
Vocabulary

  • Multiple-meaning words

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.4.A — Use sentence-level context as a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase.

In Shades of Meaning, students differentiate the nuances in similar words — first by ordering them from weakest to strongest, largest to smallest, or least to greatest; then by putting them into sentences that further clarify their meaning.

Skills
Vocabulary

  • Shades of meaning

Standards covered

  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.1.5.D — Distinguish shades of meaning among verbs differing in manner (e.g., look, peek, glance, stare, glare, scowl) and adjectives differing in intensity (e.g., large, gigantic) by defining or choosing them or by acting out the meanings.
  • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.L.2.5.B — Distinguish shades of meaning among closely related verbs (e.g., toss, throw, hurl) and closely related adjectives (e.g., thin, slender, skinny, scrawny).

Amplify Reading: K–2’s Integrated eReader

eReader Overview

Amplify Reading: K–2 has a new library of over 25 fiction and non-fiction ebooks and an adaptive algorithm that unlocks each book at the exact right point in a reader’s development. Moreover, they contain familiar interactions from the games so that students move seamlessly from text-embedded-in-games to games-embedded-in-text, maximizing their sense of growing competency.

The eReader also provides optional supports for its readers. From the settings icon on the title page of each book, students can turn on sentence numbering, read aloud functionality, and reveal words, as well as adjust the text size.

Student Experience
When students are ready for a text, it will appear as one of their quest steps.

When readers first unlock a new book, they read through it without interruption (with read-aloud support if appropriate).

In the second read, students discover embedded activities that repeat the familiar iconography of a game they previously mastered.

At the end of the book, additional activities evaluate students’ comprehension.

Achievements in books are part of the same overall reward system: helping your Curioso grow, just like achievement in skill-building games. Mastery of the content is reflected in the teacher dashboard within the given skill.

How teachers are using Amplify Reading

Independent study/rotation stations
Amplify Reading is a personalized, differentiated program designed to keep students engaged and on task in independent study. The program is most effective when used for a minimum of 45 minutes per week.

Other common uses
We designed the program to be flexible enough to fit any classroom model. Amplify Reading is browser-based, so it works on Chromebooks, iPads, laptops, desktops, and even iPhones. It can also be used at home to extend learning beyond the classroom.

Is this literacy program true to the Science of Reading?

We’ll show you how to tell.

We know how children learn to read. We know how to teach children to read. That’s all thanks to the Science of Reading.

As you likely know, the Science of Reading refers to the pedagogy and practices proven by extensive research to effectively teach children how to read. Learning to read is not innate, but it can be taught—and science tells us how.

That’s why it’s so important to use literacy programs that are truly grounded in the Science of Reading.

But how can you tell which ones are and which ones are not? It can be confusing. Some programs may be partially aligned with the Science of Reading, or use bits and pieces of pedagogy based on it.

But true Science of Reading programs have it in their DNA. And we can show you how to find them.

Explicit and systematic structure

One of the research-based frameworks used in the Science of Reading is the Simple View of Reading.

According to the Simple View, two cognitive capacities are needed for proficient reading: (1) understanding the language (comprehension) and (2) recognizing words in print (decoding).

A true Science of Reading program is built from the start for students to develop these skills. And it’s built to do so in a developmentally appropriate way. That is, program structure matters, too.

Some programs may add supplemental Science of Reading activities to address these needs. Some have been modified to do the same. But that’s not the same as a comprehensive program designed to develop them, explicitly and systematically. That kind of program is truly rooted in the Science of Reading.

The importance of knowledge building

Again, reading depends on both decoding and comprehension. For many years, classroom observation and received wisdom suggested that comprehension should be taught as its own set of skills, while allowing decoding to develop more naturally.

But cognitive science research now shows that early literacy skills are best built deliberately—on a foundation of knowledge. In fact, knowledge-building is not a result of reading and comprehension, but a prerequisite for it. The more you know, the faster you learn.

Some programs rely on the strategy of activating students’ prior knowledge. But not all kids have the same prior knowledge. Diverse backgrounds and experiences mean that not all kids will come to school with the same information about, let’s say, baseball, or the beach.

So a true Science of Reading program will expose students to a diverse array of new topics spanning history, science, and literature. Those topics will be organized in an intentional sequence that builds knowledge coherently within and across grades. And they will make reading accessible to all students.

The foundational skills readers need

Some programs focus on phonemic awareness and phonics. Those are foundational skills, but they’re not all of the foundational skills. The Science of Reading shows that five components are fundamental to reading: phonics, phonemic awareness, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension.

Students require instruction in all five in order to learn to recognize words and use that knowledge for reading and writing.

As students develop these foundational skills, they develop automaticity. With practice, they are able to recognize words more and more quickly and move from decoding to comprehension.

A true Science of Reading program will include all foundational skills and will deliver the regular practice students need to become automatic decoders.

How Amplify CKLA is built on the Science of Reading

The Science of Reading is in Amplify CKLA’s DNA. The program was built from the ground up:

  • On the Simple View of Reading.
  • To deliver knowledge on an even playing field for all students.
  • With texts that develop all five foundational literacy skills.

With CKLA, students build knowledge through diverse and enriching content domains. They refine foundational skills through explicit, systematic, phonics-focused instruction. And they do it all in one program, with a detailed road map that guides teachers on every step of the reading journey.

Additional resources

5 ways to shift from balanced literacy to the Science of Reading

MTSS vs. RTI in literacy instruction: What’s the difference?

Four ways to engage middle-school students in ELA

You know how engaged middle-school students are—in their own emotions, relationships, and TikToks. How do you engage them in your ELA classroom?

It’s tough! It’s not just about holding their attention while they’re in class. We need to provide the kind of real engagement that leads to real learning.

Research confirms (not surprisingly) that getting middle schoolers ready for college and career depends on it, and requires a truly engaging ELA curriculum.

The stakes are high. Sixth-grade students who fail a literacy course are more than 50% more likely to not graduate from high school.

Yet, on average, middle-school ELA students spend less than 20% of class time engaged with the text. In a 50-minute class period, that’s only 10 minutes of text.

At Amplify, we believe greater engagement with text is key not only for ELA success, but for all academics. That’s why we created these four actionable principles of middle-school ELA engagement.

Middle-school is a moment—one we must seize.

First, here’s why middle schoolers require an approach and curriculum designed just for them.

Young people at middle-school age are becoming increasingly independent, and increasingly self-conscious. They need to feel respected and safe when they participate, especially when they make mistakes. They’re super focused on their peers, but they still depend on guidance from you.

There’s a lot going on in their worlds, and there’s a lot going on in their brains. In fact, early adolescence is the second-biggest stage of rapid brain development.

The development is happening largely in the prefrontal cortex. It’s the area that brain researcher Maryanne Wolf calls “the cognitive workspace.” When it comes to middle-school ELA curriculum, we want to use strategies that engage students in using their cognitive workspaces.

The 4 principles of middle-school engagement

We believe these four principles are most essential to engaging middle-school students in developing their literacy skills—and becoming confident, active learners.

  1. Enable all students to work up. Provide multiple entry points and scaffolds so that every student can find their way into a text or activity. Here are some differentiation strategies:
    1. Incorporate multimedia. Often a video dramatization or audio recording can help students connect with a complex text.
    2. Scaffold with passage previews, read-alongs, and questions that make students want to re-read.
    3. Don’t forget vocab! Daily practice makes a huge difference, especially with assignments designed to challenge students at their level.
  2. Provide just right feedback. At this age, it’s important for students to see opportunity rather than failure.
    1. Quick over-the-shoulder notes feel actionable and encouraging.
    2. Training all students to offer helpful comments creates a positive vibe around feedback.
    3. Focusing on specifics helps students know how to proceed and improve.
  3. Engage multiple modalities, especially collaboration. Students comprehend text in all sorts of ways—hearing, speaking, writing, seeing, performing, and more. Try alternate modalities like dramatic readings or debates, which also give students the benefits of working together.
  4. Promote critical thinking. This one’s the biggest idea beneath all the others.

To be fully engaged, middle schoolers need to know that their work is relevant and recognized. A truly engaging curriculum supports a range of observations and interpretations. Some approaches:

  1. Be clear that the text, not the teacher, has the answers. Ask questions like “How did you get to that response?” Help students follow this rule: If you can justify it in the text, you can hold on to your interpretation.
  2. Guide students to develop theories rather than get it right. For example, ask questions like “Why does (or doesn’t) this make sense?”
  3. Try the Socratic style. Emphasizing inquiry and discussion brings home the power of open-ended questions. It also positions the teacher as facilitator, not deliverer of all knowledge.

These principles won’t just help your students get through middle-school—they’ll help you get through to your middle schoolers.

Learn more.

Read more about Amplify ELA, including an overview of the components of the curriculum in grades 6–8.

The importance of reading fluency in effective literacy instruction

There’s a difference between the ability to sound out words on a page and the ability to truly understand their meaning. That difference? Reading fluency. 

Fluency is one of the five foundational reading skills. (The other four, as you likely know, are  phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension.) Fluency connects readers not just to words, but to emotions and expressions, characters and connotations. And it’s also where reading really starts to foster joy. 

In this post, we’ll explore what fluency is, why it matters, and how to successfully incorporate it into your literacy instruction. 

Defining fluency

The International Literacy Association defines reading fluency as “reasonably accurate reading, at an appropriate rate, with suitable expression, that leads to accurate and deep comprehension and motivation to read.” 

In other words, fluency is not just reading fast. And it goes beyond merely decoding words, to developing a deep understanding of what they’re trying to say. Fluency allows readers to connect ideas, recognize patterns, and infer meanings. 

“I call fluency the bridge to comprehension,” says Kent State literary education professor Tim Rasinski, discussing the topic on Amplify’s Science of Reading: The Podcast

Why fluency in reading matters

Rasinski is also director of Kent State’s award-winning reading clinic, and in his podcast episode, he describes encountering students as old as grade 5 who have decoding skills, but not fluency. “[These students] can sound words out, but if you were to hear them read orally, it would be slow, laborious reading in a monotone,” he says. According to Rasinski, these students aren’t getting “much joy and satisfaction, or even comprehension” from their reading. 

While oral expression in reading is not the ultimate goal, it is an indicator. “The way you read orally reflects the way you read silently,” Rasinski says. “Most of us would say when we read silently we ‘hear’ ourselves with our internal voice.” 

When readers develop fluency, they also develop: 

  • Comprehension. As decoding becomes more effortless, readers can focus on understanding meaning. Fluent readers recognize words automatically, allowing them to dedicate cognitive resources to complex sentence structures and connections among ideas. They grasp both main points and nuances. All told, they get what they’re reading. 
  • Confidence. Fluent readers are more likely to feel accomplished, proud, and motivated with regards to their reading abilities. And it’s a virtuous cycle: As their confidence grows, they’re more likely to engage in and enjoy reading—and continue to improve. 
  • Vocabulary. Fluency plays a significant role in vocabulary acquisition and language development. Fluent readers encounter a larger variety of words in context. This exposure enhances their language and communication skills across academic topics and life experiences. 
  • Academic success. Fluency helps students read to learn. As students advance through school, fluency becomes increasingly important for comprehension and analysis of more advanced and content-rich texts.
  • Emotional connection. Fluency enables readers to connect with the characters, emotions, experiences, and implications in a given text. That’s what makes reading immersive and enjoyable—in the moment and for a lifetime. 

The fluency journey: learning and assessment

The Science of Reading tells us that foundational reading skills must be taught explicitly and systematically, and fluency is no exception. Developing reading fluency is a gradual process that requires consistent practice and exposure to different types of texts. There are several stages and skills that support the development of reading fluency. 

  • Fluency starts with accuracy in decoding. As students practice and improve their phonics skills, they can accurately recognize and decode more and more words. This helps them move from laborious reading toward more efficient reading.
  • Speed comes as a result of accuracy. As students become more accurate in decoding, they can read words more quickly. Accuracy helps reduce the time it takes to identify and process each word, allowing for a smoother and faster reading experience.
  • Fluency practice helps with automaticity. And the more students develop both accuracy and speed, the more they develop automaticity. 

As you may know, there’s a tool called Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) that reading professionals use as a quick-read thermometer of sorts to measure reading speed and accuracy. It’s a simple assessment, measuring how many words a student reads correctly in an unpracticed passage. It’s considered one of the best indicators of a student’s reading progress. 

“It works! It has validity. It gives us good, useful information,” says researcher, educational consultant, and author Dr. Jan Hasbrouck on Science of Reading: The Podcast. That’s why it’s widely used—but, she adds, it’s also widely misunderstood. 

It is a reliable and helpful measure of fluency in terms of reading rate and accuracy, she says. At the same time, “It was unfortunate to put the label ‘fluency’ on it,” she says. “We reading teachers think of fluency as something much more multifaceted and complex that at minimum includes prosody, or expression. It is accuracy, rate, expression, metacognition, background knowledge—it’s all of this stuff that really experienced reading teachers think of as fluency.” 

Fluency best practices for literary instruction

Automaticity frees up cognitive space for comprehension, but fluency isn’t just about reading fast—it’s also about making meaning, which is where prosody comes in. 

Prosody refers to the rhythm, intonation, and expression used by someone reading aloud. 

But it’s not just for the natural performers in the classroom. Prosody can be influenced. How do we help students develop that external, and internal, prosodic voice? 

Through targeted read-aloud practice. By explicitly teaching students about prosody and providing systematic practice opportunities, educators can nurture fluency and comprehension simultaneously—a connection to overall reading success that is well-supported by evidence-based research. 

Some fluency strategies include: 

  • Reader’s Theater in the classroom: Students don’t have to be skilled actors to take on roles and read from scripts. Theater activities allow them to practice recognition and expressions of drama and emotion as they bring the lines to life. 
  • Assisted reading: When students read aloud simultaneously with a more fluent reader, they practice their own skills while also hearing someone else make meaning of the same text. This can also take the form of choral reading, i.e., students reading aloud as a group, focusing on using appropriate intonation and expression. Reading together allows them to practice prosody in a supportive and collaborative environment.
  • Consistent reinforcement and rewards: Rasinski works with students on snippets of text, first with prosody modeled by teachers, then practiced alone and together (repeated reading), then performed for each other or even parents or other adults who offer praise. This regular practice helps boost the confidence and motivation that assists students in developing fluency. “We want children to experience reading success every single day,” says Rasinski. 

More to explore

The Science of Writing: Key to mastering reading

Book cover titled "Science of Writing: A Primer," with colorful scientific and handwriting illustrations in the background.

We know that “reading, writing, and ‘rithmetic” doesn’t cover all the core skills students must learn in school. Still, it’s easy to sense in our gut why reading and writing come first—and together. Reading and writing reinforce each other.

The way we now understand these two skills and how kids learn them is connected, too. That is, the Science of Reading and the Science of Writing are also linked, and invaluable. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 27% of 12th graders achieved a proficient level in writing in 2011.

The key to unlocking literacy success resides not just in understanding the Science of Writing, but also in acknowledging its dynamic connection to the Science of Reading.

Connecting writing with literacy development

The Science of Reading refers to the vast collection of evidence-based practices that explore and explain how kids learn to read and form the foundation for literacy instruction that works. It emphasizes key components such as phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. It stipulates that—no matter what magical worlds reading unlocks—reading instruction must be systematic and intentional.

The Science of Reading clearly indicates how best to support students as they learn to read. But reading is only half of the literacy equation. What about writing?

Akin to the Science of Reading, the Science of Writing refers to the body of research that examines effective writing instruction and the processes involved in developing writing skills. It emphasizes explicit, systematic teaching of writing structures, strategies, and conventions—again, similar to the Science of Reading’s approach. This includes understanding the cognitive processes behind planning, drafting, revising, and editing, as well as the development of handwriting, grammar, and composition skills.

The Science of Writing also highlights the importance of integrating writing with reading instruction. It enhances comprehension and communication abilities by reinforcing language skills through practical application.

Using instruction based on the Science of Writing can transform student communication, making it clearer, more effective, and more creative—opening up new worlds of connection, expression, and opportunity. Indeed, the 2024 survey by The National Association of Colleges and Employers found that 73% of employers look for written communication skills when selecting candidates to hire.

Effective instruction: Why teach writing and reading in tandem

This doesn’t mean that we should use evidence-based methods to teach reading in the morning, and then evidence-based methods to teach writing in the afternoon.

An integrated approach to reading and writing isn’t just beneficial—it’s essential. These two facets of literacy are interwoven processes that enhance each other. The more students read, the more they know. And a robust knowledge base helps students become not only stronger readers, but also stronger writers.

When students read a variety of texts, they absorb different writing styles, sentence structures, and vocabularies, which can serve as models for their own writing. Reading instruction based in the Science of Reading can also help students address writing problems and challenges. And writing about what they read also helps students deepen their capacity for both comprehension and expression.

Explicit and structured writing instruction is necessary for all students to be successful writers, as well as successful readers. When students write, they employ the same comprehension skills they use in reading.

How to teach writing and reading together

Here are just a few strategies to consider:

  • Inspiration through imitation. Use reading materials as models for writing assignments. Encourage students to mimic sentence structures or vocabulary from texts they read.
  • Read and respond: After reading, have students engage in response writing. This practice not only sharpens writing skills, but also reinforces comprehension by encouraging reflection and analysis.
  • Instruct on structure. Introduce students to the writing process: prewriting/outlining, drafting, revising, and editing. These steps parallel the cognitive processes students use when understanding complex texts.

To learn more about reading, writing, and realizing every student’s full potential, check out:

Welcome, Algebra 1 Reviewers!

We’re honored to introduce you to Amplify Desmos Math California. We’re confident you’ll find this comprehensive program to be a powerful tool for bringing the vision of the California Math Framework to life in classrooms across the state.

Please start with the video on the right to learn how to navigate the program and access key features referenced within our submission. Below you’ll find additional resources to support your review.

Your Review Samples

As a curriculum that incorporates both print and digital resources, it’s important that you explore both our physical materials (delivered to you in grade-specific tubs) and our digital materials (accessible through our platform). We invite you to explore both types of resources using the instructions and tips below.

Print Samples

Your print samples should have arrived in grade-specific tubs with a copy of your Reviewer Binder contained within the Algebra 1 shipping box. As you begin the process of organizing your materials, please refer to the inventory checklist found inside the tub as well as within your Reviewer Binder.

Digital Samples

In order to access your digital samples, you’ll need to log into our platform using your unique login credentials found on a Digital Access Flyer inside of your Reviewer Binder. Once you have located the flyer:

  • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
  • Click “Log in with Amplify.”
  • Enter the username and password provided on your Digital Access Flyer.

Navigation Tips

Below you will find helpful tips for navigating Amplify Desmos Math California. We recommend reading these pages alongside the program’s print materials and digital experience to gain a deeper understanding of the program. 

Click the links below to read about navigating program features including:

Built for California

The Amplify Desmos Math California program is designed around the vision articulated in the California Mathematics Framework to enable all California students to become powerful users of mathematics. Our program incorporates the latest research in student learning, meaning that we:

  • Focus on the Big Ideas: Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. Big Ideas, like standards, are not considered in isolation. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons.
  • Center on open and engaging tasks: Amplify Desmos Math California is grounded in engaging tasks meant to address students’ often-asked question: “Why am I learning this?”  Students are invited into learning with low-floor, high-ceiling tasks that provide an entry point for all. Open tasks in Amplify Desmos Math California provide the space for students to try on multiple strategies and represent their thinking in different ways, and allow student explanation and discussion to serve as the center of the classroom. All lessons offer both print and digital representations of lessons.
  • Provide enhanced digital experiences: Amplify Desmos Math California includes digitally-enhanced lesson activities, incorporating interactive digital tools alongside print materials. These purposefully-placed resources allow students to visualize mathematical concepts, receive actionable feedback while practicing, encounter personalized learning support from an onscreen tutor, and engage in discussions about their thinking and approaches.
  • Treat core instruction and differentiation as integral partners: The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to lesson content and offer students the individualized support as they dive into the mathematics.

Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards

Standards Map

Linked here is the Standards Map for Amplify Desmos Math California for Algebra 1.

Evaluation Criteria Map

Linked here is the Evaluation Criteria Map Algebra 1. Please note that you will need to be logged into the digital platform to access the links in the Evaluation Criteria Map.

Standards for Mathematical Practice

Linked here is the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the Standards for Mathematical Practice at Algebra 1.

Drivers of Investigation and Content Connections

Amplify Desmos Math California incorporates the Drivers of Investigation (DIs) and Content Connection (CCs) throughout the program. Throughout the year, students engage with open and authentic tasks of varying durations — from lesson activities to unit-level Explore lessons and longer course-level Investigations. Every lesson and investigation opportunity is grounded around the why, how, and what of the learning experience, and helps teachers bring mathematical concepts to life.

A three-column chart details: Drivers of Investigation, Standards for Mathematical Practice, and Content Connections, each with their respective codes and brief descriptions.

California English Language Development Standards

Linked here is the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the California English Language Development Standards for Algebra 1.

California Environmental Principles and Concepts

Select lessons, performance tasks, and investigations across grade levels in Amplify Desmos Math California are aligned to one or more of the California Environmental Principles and Concepts. Click this link to view how the California Environmental Principles and Concepts are represented in Amplify Desmos Math California Algebra 1.

Category 2: Program Organization

Amplify Desmos Math California thoughtfully combines conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application. Each lesson is designed to tell a story by posing problems that invite a variety of approaches before guiding students to synthesize their understanding of the learning goals.

Big Ideas

Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. Big Ideas, like standards, are not considered in isolation. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons. Please refer to Keeping the Big Ideas at the Center, linked here, for the Amplify Desmos Math California Algebra 1 lesson design and alignment to the Big Ideas.

Program Structure

Amplify Desmos Math California combines the best of problem-based lessons, intervention, personalized practice, and assessments into a coherent and engaging experience for both students and teachers.

A diagram showing three stages: Core instruction, Integrated personalized learning, and Embedded intervention, under Screening and progress monitoring with daily tiered support.

Lessons and units in Amplify Desmos Math California are designed around a Proficiency Progression, a model that steps out problem-based learning by systematically building students’ curiosity into lasting grade-level understanding.

Five steps for learning: 1. Activate prior knowledge, 2. Collaborate, 3. Refine ideas, 4. Guide to understanding, 5. Practice and extend for lasting understanding.

In the Proficiency Progression, lessons begin by activating students’ natural curiosity and offering opportunities to generate new ideas through collaboration. Teachers are then able to refine ideas through intentional facilitation and guide students to grade-level understanding, while students retain the ability to use different strategies and methods to show their comprehension of the content. Students are provided ample opportunities to develop lasting understanding.

Scope and Sequence

Below you can view the scope and sequence for Amplify Desmos Math California Algebra 1. 

A chart showing Algebra 1 units across two volumes, detailing instructional days, assessment days, and optional days for each unit, totaling 180 days plus 40 optional days.

Lesson Design and Structure

A four-part diagram shows: Warm-Up, Activities with a graph of student ideas to grade-level understanding, Synthesis with notes, and Practice and differentiation with students building a structure.

Amplify Desmos Math California is designed with a structured approach to problem-based learning that systematically builds on students’ curiosity and allows students to grapple with the Big Ideas of the California Framework. Every lesson activity is organized into a Launch, Monitor, Connect format.

Launch: The launch is a short, whole-class conversation that creates a need or excitement, provides clarity, or helps students connect their prior knowledge or personal experience, which ensures that everyone has access to the upcoming work.  

Monitor: As students work individually, in pairs, or in groups, teachers explore student thinking, ask questions, and provide support to help move the conversations closer to the intended math learning goal. 

Connect: Teachers connect students’ ideas to the key learning goals of the lesson, facilitating class discussions that help synthesize and solidify the Big Ideas 

Each lesson within Amplify Desmos Math California follows the same structure. 

Warm-Up: Every Amplify Desmos Math California lesson begins with a whole class Warm-Up. Warm-Ups are an invitational Instructional Routine intended to provide a social moment at the start of the lesson in which every student has an opportunity to contribute. Warm-Ups may build fluency or highlight a strategy that may be helpful in the current lesson or act as an invitation into the math of the lesson.

Lesson Activities: Each lesson includes one or two activities. These activities are the heart of each lesson. Students notice, wonder, explore, calculate, predict, measure, explain their thinking, use math to settle disputes, create challenges for their classmates, and more. Guidance is provided to help teachers launch, monitor, and connect student thinking over the course of the activity.

Synthesis and Show What You Know: The Synthesis is an opportunity for the teacher and students to pull all the learning of the lesson together into a lesson takeaway. Students engage in a facilitated discussion to consolidate and refine their ideas about the learning goals, and the teacher synthesizes students’ learning. Show What You Know is a daily assessment opportunity for students to show what they know about the learning goals and what they are still learning.

Practice and Differentiation: Daily practice problems for the day’s lesson are included both online and in the print Student Edition, including fluency, test practice, and spiral review.

Flowchart showing classroom activity timing: Warm-Up (5 min), Lesson Activities (30 min), Synthesis and Show What You Know (10 min), Practice and Differentiation (time varies).

Routines

Amplify Desmos Math California features a variety of lesson routines. Instructional routines and Math Language Routines (MLRs) are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition. Both are called out at point-of-use within the Teacher Edition and Teacher Presentation Screens. Below are the types of routines used throughout the Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum:

  • MLR1: Stronger and Clearer Each Time
  • MLR2: Collect and Display
  • MLR3: Critique, Correct, Clarify
  • MLR5: Co-Craft Questions
  • MLR6: Three Reads
  • MLR7: Compare and Connect
  • MLR 8: Discussion Supports
  • Decide and Defend
  • Notice and Wonder
  • Number Talk
  • Tell a Story
  • Think-Pair-Share
  • Which One Doesn’t Belong?

Category 3: Assessments

A variety of performance data in Amplify Desmos Math California provides evidence of student learning, while helping students bolster their skills and understanding.

Unit-Level Assessment

Amplify Desmos Math California has embedded unit assessments that offer key insights into students’ conceptual understanding of math. These assessments provide regular, actionable information about how students are thinking about and processing math, with both auto-scoring and in-depth rubrics that help teachers anticipate and respond to students’ learning needs.

Pre-Unit Check: Each unit begins with a formative assessment designed to identify the student skills that will be particularly relevant to the upcoming unit. This check is agnostic to the standards covered in the following unit and serves not as a deficit-based acknowledgment of what students do not know, but rather as an affirmation of the knowledge and skills with which students come in.

End-of-Unit Assessment: Students engage with rigorous grade-level mathematics through a variety of formats and tasks in the summative End-of-Unit Assessment. A combination of auto-scored (when completed digitally) and rubric-scored items provides deep insights into student thinking. All Amplify Desmos Math California End-of-Unit Assessments include two forms.

Sub-Unit Quizzes: Sub-Unit Quizzes are formative assessments embedded regularly in Algebra 1. In these checks, students are assessed on a subset of conceptual understandings from the unit, with rubrics that help illuminate students’ current understanding and provide guidance for responding to student thinking.

Performance Tasks: At the end of each unit there is a summative assessment performance task provided to evaluate students’ proficiency with the concepts and skills addressed in the unit. 

Lesson-Level Assessments

Amplify Desmos Math California lessons include daily moments of assessment to provide valuable evidence of learning for both the teacher and student. Beyond formative, summative, and benchmark assessments, students also have opportunities for self-reflection with Watch Your Knowledge Grow. Students take ownership of their learning by reflecting and tracking their progress before and after each unit.

Show What You Know: Each lesson has a daily formative assessment focused on one of the key concepts in the lesson. Show What You Know moments are carefully designed to minimize completion time for students while maximizing daily teacher insights to attend to student needs during the following class. 

Responsive Feedback™: Teachers have the ability to see and provide in-the-moment feedback as students progress through a digital lesson. Responsive Feedback motivates students and engages them in the learning process.

Diagnostic Assessment

Every grade level features an asset-based diagnostic assessment designed to be administered at the beginning of the year.  Delivered digitally and to the whole class, our diagnostic assessment is uniquely designed to reveal underlying math thinking and identify what students know about grade-level math. With data beyond just right and wrong, teachers have the type of deeper level of insights need to take the right next step.

CAASPP-Aligned Assessment Preparation

Amplify Desmos Math is designed to support students’ mathematical development through problem-based learning, differentiation, and embedded assessments. The program’s emphasis on conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application aligns with the mathematical practices and content standards assessed by the CAASPP.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a CAASPP-aligned Item Bank. This standards-aligned bank of questions allows teachers to filter and search by grade and standard to find items. Once assigned on the digital platform, students will experience CAASPP-like practice with the online digital tools.

Data and Reporting

Amplify Desmos Math California provides teachers and administrators with unified reporting and insights so that educators have visibility into what students know about grade-level math—and can plan instruction accordingly for the whole class, small groups, and individual students. Reporting functionality integrates unit assessments, lesson assessments, diagnostic data and progress monitoring for a comprehensive look at student learning. Program reports show proficiency and growth by domain, cluster, standard, and priority concept using performance data from unit assessments, then highlight areas of potential student need to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support.

Administrator reporting provides a complete picture of student, class, and district performance, allowing administrators to implement instructional and intervention plans.

Category 4: Access and Equity

The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Our lessons are developed using the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to proactively ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.

Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to the day’s content and offer students the individualized supports they need to be successful.

Each lesson and unit contains guidance for teachers on how to identify students who may need support, students who need to keep strengthening their understanding, and students who may be ready to stretch their learning. In addition, teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students.

Universal Design for Learning

Each lesson in the program incorporates opportunities for engagement, representation, action, and expression based on the guidelines of Universal Design for Learning (UDL).

  • Multiple Means of Engagement: Students engage in both print and digital learning, and are regularly participating in discussions and hands-on activities. Students are invited to build their own challenge for other students to solve, which provides opportunities for choice and autonomy, as well as joy and play.
  • Multiple Means of Representation: Students are encouraged to demonstrate their learning using mathematical representations, both print and digital, and regularly engage with their peers in analyzing multiple possible solutions. Classes engage in open-ended discussions about what individual students notice and wonder about mathematical concepts.
  • Multiple Means of Action and Expression: Learners differ in how they navigate learning environments and express what they know. Students can communicate their ideas in multiple ways, including in print, sketching, uploading photos, or recording an audio response.

Accessibility

Every lesson includes at least one specific suggestion the teacher can use to increase access to the lesson without reducing the mathematical demand of the tasks. These suggestions address the following areas:

  • Conceptual Processing
  • Visual-Spatial Processing
  • Executive Functioning
  • Memory and Attention
  • Fine Motor Skills

Students have the ability to control accessibility tools so that each learning experience is customized to their individual needs. In many instances, these tools can be turned on or off at any point of instruction.

  • Text to speech: Reads text instructions to students in multiple languages
  • Enlarged font: Increases the size of all text on screen
  • Braille mode: Includes narration of digital interactions
  • Language selection: Toggles between languages

Differentiation: In-Lesson Teacher Moves

Within every lesson activity, teachers can use the suggestions in the Differentiation Teacher Moves table to provide in-the-moment instructional support while students are engaged in the work of the lesson. This table can help teachers anticipate the ways students may approach the activity, and provides prompts that they can use during the lesson to Support, Strengthen, and Stretch individual students in their thinking. Teachers are provided with clear student actions and understanding to look for, each matched with immediately usable suggestions for how to respond to the student thinking illustrated in each row of the table. In addition to using these suggestions in the moment as teachers monitor student work, teachers can review the Differentiation table in advance to help them anticipate how students are likely to approach the activity.

A chart outlines three differentiation strategies—Support, Strengthen, and Stretch—with specific actions for each. A Math Language Development box is shown at the bottom.

Differentiation: Beyond the Lesson

Teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students needing support, strengthening, and stretching after each lesson. Support, Strengthen, and Stretch resources include:

  • Mini-Lessons: 15-minute, small-group direct instruction lessons targeted to a specific concept or skill
  • Item Banks: Space for teachers to create practice and assessments by using filters and searching for standards, summative-style items, and more
  • Fluency Practice: Adaptive, personalized practice built out for basic operations and more
  • Extensions: Lesson-embedded Teacher Moves including possible stretch questions and activities for students
  • Lesson Practice: Additional practice problems support every lesson
  • Math Adventures: Strategy-based math games where students engage with math concepts and practice skills in a fun digital environment
  • Lesson Summary Support: Support for students and caregivers that provides efficient explanation of the learning goal with clear examples

Math Identity and Community

The Math Identity and Community feature supports teachers in helping students build confidence in their own mathematical thinking, develop skills to work with and learn from others when doing math, and learn how math is an interwoven part of their broader community. The embedded prompts throughout the lessons are designed to highlight what it means to be good at math, the value of sharing ideas, and the power of flexible and creating thinking. Here are some examples of the Math Identity and Community supports embedded in each lesson:

  • I can be all of me in math class. You will work with partners every day in math class. What do you want your partners to know about you? 
  • We are a math community. What does good listening look like and sound like in a math community? 
  • I am a doer of math. What math strengths did you use today?

Math Language Development

Every lesson in Amplify Desmos Math California includes opportunities for all students to develop mathematical language as they experience the content. Amplify Desmos Math California purposefully progresses language development from lesson to lesson and across units by supporting students in making their arguments and explanations stronger, clearer, and more precise. This systematic approach to the development of math language can be broken down into the following four categories of support:

  • Vocabulary: Units and lessons start by surfacing students’ language for new concepts, then building connections between their language and the new vocabulary for that unit. This honors the language assets that students bring into their learning.
  • Language Goals: Language goals attend to the mathematics students are learning, and are written through the lens of one or more of four language modalities: reading, writing, speaking, and listening.
  • Math Language Routines: Math Language Routines are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition.
  • Multilingual/English Learner Supports: Supports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentional points within each lesson. These specific, targeted suggestions support ML/ELs with modifications that increase access to a task, or through development of contextual or mathematical language (both of which can be supportive of all learners). 

Multilingual and English Learner Supports

Amplify partnered with the English Learner Success Forum (ELSF), a national nonprofit organization that advocates for high-quality instructional materials that are inclusive of multilingual learners. ELSF reviewed Amplify Desmos Math California, and provided directional guidance and feedback to ensure that the program reflects their research-based instructional strategies for multilingual/English learners.

Our Math Language Development Resources book contains lesson-specific strategies and activities for all levels of English Learners (i.e., Emerging, Expanding, Bridging). With support for every lesson, teachers are empowered to help all students, regardless of their language skills, to participate fully, grasp the material, and excel in their mathematical journey.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a digital glossary for languages other than Spanish. Translations will be provided for up to nine languages.

Amplify Desmos Math California will include Spanish student-facing materials beginning in the 2026–27 school year.

Category 5: Instructional Planning and Support

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a variety of embedded instructional supports to empower teachers to lead effectively and gain actionable insights into student growth and progress. Teachers are equipped with a comprehensive set of resources designed to fulfill the requirements of Category 5.

Within the Teacher Edition front matter:

  • Scope and sequence
  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Unit and Sub-Unit Overview:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Math that Matters Most
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Lesson:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

At the course level (within the Teacher Edition front matter):

  • Navigating the Program (both print and digital)
  • Facilitating Lesson Activities with Launch, Monitor and Connect
  • Overview of the Digital Facilitation Tools

At the lesson level:

  • Suggestions for timing
  • What materials to prep
  • How to organize and group students 
  • Key lesson takeaways with the Synthesis
  • Recommendations for Differentiation
  • Strategies for intervention and extensions (in the Intervention, Extensions, and Investigation Resources book)

At the activity level:

  • Differentiation recommendations
  • Accessibility tips
  • ML / EL tips
  • Teacher look-fors
  • Recommended Teacher Moves
  • Prompts for guiding student thinking 
  • Sample student responses

A variety of language development supports are provided within the Student and Teacher Editions and Math Language Development Resources book. 

At the lesson level:

  • Diagrams and visuals
  • Sentence frames and word banks
  • Graphic organizers, including Frayer models
  • Vocabulary routines
  • Embedded language supports aligned to the CA ELDs
  • Lesson-specific strategies for Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging

At the unit level: 

  • Words With Multiple Meanings
  • Contextual vocabulary

At the course level:

  • English/Spanish cognates
  • Multilingual Glossary 

Other Curriculum Guidance

  • Additional Practice Resources book
  • Assessment Resources book 
  • Assess and Respond guidance paired with each assessment opportunity
  • Show-What-You-Know activities
  • Answer keys and rubrics 
  • Performance tasks

S3 – 05. Developing an asset orientation with Lani Horn

Math Teacher Lounge podcast featuring Lani Horn, a professor at Vanderbilt University, on developing an asset orientation.

In this episode, math education professor Lani Horn shares with us what it means to have an asset orientation towards students, contrasting it with a deficit orientation, and helping Bethany and Dan understand the many ways students experience one or the other. Their conversation hit both high notes and low notes and included a challenge that Bethany and Dan both found extremely valuable for helping a teacher develop an asset orientation towards their students.

Explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page

Download Transcript

Dan Meyer (00:03)

Welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge, folks. My name is Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:07):

And I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson.

Dan Meyer (00:09):

We’re so excited to be here with you folks and with our guest today, tackling big questions about mathematics. I wanna ask Bethany first though: Bethany, it’s been kind of a challenging couple of years for those of us in education, near education, just in life in general, of course. But I woke up this morning and the sun was out; the weather was perfect and crisp here in Oakland; and I found myself feeling optimistic, a sense of hopefulness. And I was wondering to myself, “What is Bethany feeling hopeful about in math education right now?” What’s got you juiced up a little bit?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:40):

I gotta say, that optimism, Dan, look at that! I can actually feel the sunshine just pouring through the microphone! So I thank you for asking. What am I feeling optimistic about in math education? Hmm. OK, this is gonna sound a little bit cop-out-y, but I have been so completely jazzed about not only our podcast, but the conversations that I’ve been seeing circulating in other math podcasts that are out there around curriculum, around new books coming out. It just feels like despite overwhelm, despite exhaustion, that most teachers really do love learning. And so there’s like that kernel. And so I just feel like there’s books on my shelf I wanna read; there’s podcasts in the queue I wanna listen to; and summertime is the best, best time to do it.

Dan Meyer (01:39):

People still feel hungry out there for learning. They know the importance of the craft and its impact on students. And, yeah, people are tired, but also it is so cool to see people still jazzed about learning more about how to teach students more effectively. Me, I’m excited right now, I have a very specific excitement right now, which is that today we announced that Desmos, where I work, and Amplify, our sponsor, are no longer gonna be two separate things. That we are joining together. That I, and all these people who have done so much work over the last 10 years developing digital math technology, we’re gonna go and work inside of Amplify as a division called Desmos Classroom. And we’re so excited that…what we cracked, I think, at Desmos, is a way of thinking about how teachers and their tools—computers, for instance—interact with students in math. And I love what we did there. But we never really cracked the question of, “How do you support entire school systems in taking up these ideas and tools?” And Amplify has really done that. So I’m super-excited to partner up there. That’s what I’m optimistic about and happy about.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:40):

Congratulations! That’s a huge transition, and I’m just so excited about the amazing work that both Amplify and Desmos do. But then, the idea of Desmos being in more classrooms? Those tools being available for more students? With the reach? I mean, I’m just excited! It’s a big day, Dan.

Dan Meyer (03:00):

Thank you. Yes, exciting day. And I’m excited about also about our guest we’re bringing on today. How’s that for a segue? I’ll be excited to hear what our guest is excited about in math education. I just wanna say that what our guest, Lani Horn, Professor Lani Horn, has exposed us to is this idea of an asset orientation and its importance. And I do think I’m not over-exaggerating or overstating to say that the idea of an asset orientation towards students and their thinking has been possibly the most transformative idea for me in the last five years of being an educator. And adopting it has led to my favorite lessons, my favorite teaching experiences, my favorite relationships with students. I say all that—you know, I don’t wanna gas things up too much; is that too high of a bar here to have expectations? But it really has been tremendous! And Lani Horn gave a talk several years ago called “An Asset Orientation Is Everything,” which really changed the game up for me. And Bethany watched it as well. So that’s why I’m so excited to have on the person who gave that talk. And who’s done so much research around what an asset orientation offers students and teachers. So we’re bringing on today Lani Horn, who is a professor of mathematics education at Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, who centers her research on ways to make authentic mathematics, ambitious math teaching, accessible to students and teachers, particularly those who have been historically marginalized by our educational system. I think Lani has just a beating heart for students, yes, but also really respects the work of teaching in ways I think are so needed and sometimes uncommon in the world of math-education research. So Lani, thank you so much for coming on and joining us in the Lounge.

Lani Horn (04:41):

Thanks for having me.

Dan Meyer (04:44):

We would love to know what you are excited about and optimistic about right now in the world of mathematics education. What’s got you a little bit gassed up?

Lani Horn (04:52):

Up, gassed up? Hmm. Let me reframe it, ’cause I don’t know if I’m gassed up, but I’m cautiously hopeful that maybe that in the wake of the interrupted learning that’s been sort of widespread during the pandemic that maybe we’ll get some traction around more strategies for teaching in heterogeneous classrooms. Which I think every classroom is, to varying extents: a heterogeneous classroom. And I was talking with a colleague the other day about this idea of hmm, maybe modeling would be a really cool thing to focus teachers on. Doing some more mathematical modeling across the grade levels. Because it just seems like there’s a lot of opportunities for kids to kind of catch up on ideas and understandings that they may not have fully grasped because of interrupted learning, interrupted schooling. But also with room to engage in a lot of ideas. So we were playing with that and I was like, “Gosh, that’d be pretty cool if people took that on more broadly.” ‘Cause I don’t think that there’s been enough conversations about meaningful differentiation in that kind of way, like at the level of curriculum. So I would love to see an upsurge in interest in that kind of stuff, ’cause that’s a big place where I have a lot of passion, so I’m ready! I’m ready for people to ask questions about that. And actually it’s really very, very, very closely related to the topic today of having an asset orientation towards students.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:34):

First of all, I’m so excited to have you on Math Teacher Lounge, have you in the Lounge, and get to talk to you, because when Dan sent me this talk, my first thing was, “Oh, I think I know what asset orientation is and looks like.” You know, you kind of hypothesize about what you think it’s going to be. And then you started talking and I’m like, “Wait, wait, why am I just hearing this now?” So I thought I knew what it was, but really I felt like there was so much to unpack. And I would just love for you to share with our listeners, in case they are like, “Oh, asset orientation, I know what that is. I’ve got it. My students have got it.” What is it? And why does it matter so much to our teachers?

Lani Horn (07:19):

The most obvious point is that asset is the opposite of deficit, right? And we know that deficit thinking is very harmful to students. That there’s a real teacher-expectation bias that that kids pick up on, that we communicate indirectly to students and that impacts their learning and their ability to meet our academic expectations and, other expectations in classrooms. So an asset orientation is looking for students’ strengths and trying to work from those strengths as a basis for your teaching.

Dan Meyer (07:54):

So that’s a really fantastic starting spot there. And I think what’s initially surprising to me about the research you cited in your talk, that is built around an asset orientation, is how…I think if you come at learning from a—I guess in research, they call a cognitivist frame, where learning happens when teachers say the right things that make a transfer from the teacher’s brain to the student’s brain. A lot of what you’re describing is very counterintuitive, I think. The asset orientation describes a teacher’s kind of subtle disposition. It’s not what, like what they’re saying exactly. It’s what they communicate in the subtext and the body language, that all emanates from some perspective on students and the idea that that filters down somehow and students pick up on that—like a smell in the air—and that determines a lot of their learning, I think is one part of your talk and the research that I thought was really surprising. How close is that to like how this actually works? And can you add to that description or pivot it a little bit?

Lani Horn (08:54):

Expansion of the sort of cognitive framing of teacher and student interaction…part of what’s really hard about developing and maintaining an asset orientation is that schools are organized in ways that rank and sort children. And so when we are just using the everyday language of schooling, sometimes we’re injecting these preconceived deficit notions of students into our talk and into how we’re thinking about, interpreting, looking at students. So not only is this interruption a sort of a cognitive lens on teacher-student interaction, but it’s really looking at how the social environment is setting teacher-student interaction to take on certain kinds of framings.

Dan Meyer (09:44):

This is what I mean about Lani having such a generous frame towards teachers and the work of teaching. I wonder, though, if you could help us make concrete how an asset and deficit orientation might play out in a hypothetical classroom interaction.

Lani Horn (10:00):

Sure. A really commonplace example is a teacher has a group of students. It’s October or November. So there’s already been a few assessments. And that gives the teacher an idea who the strong students are and who the struggling students are. And they’re having a classroom conversation. And someone who hasn’t performed well, a kid who hasn’t performed well on those assessments—the teacher poses a question. A kid who hasn’t performed well on the assessments is called on. And they sort of hesitate in formulating their response. And the teacher with that lens of “this is a struggling student” then may have to make a decision: “Do I persist? Do I support this kid? Do I help them formulate an answer? Do I try to draw out their thinking anyway? Or do I move on to a kid who is academically performed better in my class?” And I would say that a lot of teachers in that situation would very understandably say, “OK, I get it. You’re not a strong math student. You’re not confident in my class. I’m gonna move on because I need to get through this lesson to somebody who I know is gonna provide me with a correct answer.” And they do it also out of, sometimes, a sense of care, of not wanting to put that student on the spot. However, part of what is another unintended result of making that choice is instead of trying out that student’s thinking, listen to their sort of, maybe, hesitant answer, and trying to find the kernel in it that maybe could be supported and amplified, that kid then loses an opportunity to have their idea be a part of the whole class’s mathematical conversation. Completely common, completely understandable kind of interaction that I see all the time.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:52):

That feels so huge. And that I can actually picture that happening.

Lani Horn (11:56):

Of course. We’ve all seen it. We’ve all done it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:58):

We’ve all seen it and done it. And I think it’s so key that you mention often it’s from a place of care. Of “I want that student to—look, I called on you; you’re a part of the conversation; you’re a part of our community.” But with it, I brought all of that other information that I think I have about that kiddo. Right? And how I think they’re struggling or navigating the question. And “Here, I’ll help by…” You know? But what I immediately thought of is how much the other students also pick up on that, right?

Lani Horn (12:36):

Of course.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:36):

I remember this time, this student in my class, a student who had struggled on some of the work we were doing, she came up and she shared her work. And then another student kind of like, it was almost like a strange little pat on the back, like, “Look at that! You did it!” And like really said it in a tone of…like, you’re 5, where did that come from?? How had I set up that student to be—I really had to step back and say, “What role have I played in making this student seem like she wasn’t capable of what she had just solved?” It was such a learning moment for me. Because I don’t think teachers do it maliciously, you know, or even consciously.

Lani Horn (13:33):

Absolutely.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:34):

And it was so huge.

Lani Horn (13:36):

Thanks for sharing that, Bethany, wow.

Dan Meyer (13:38):

Even in your description, Lani, you mentioned how the need to keep the class moving to fit, again, a policy that teachers didn’t impose, that we have 45 minutes and way too many standards to cover in that many days…I wanna ask you about growth mindset. It feels like every last teacher on earth has finally got the memo about growth mindset. We all know it’s the good mindset and that the bad one is fixed mindset. And we have the posters. The posters have been distributed. <laugh> A nationwide mobilization.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (14:07):

I automatically pictured the posters.

Lani Horn (14:09):

<laugh> Of course.

Dan Meyer (14:11):

We’ve got the posters up, people! So we’re good! And now here comes asset orientation, which has some of the similar kinds of happy feelings, good vibes, about teaching and students and learning. So I was just wondering if you could help us kind of differentiate those two kinds of concepts.

Lani Horn (14:28):

I think that an asset orientation is something you’re never done cultivating. I think it’s an ongoing stance that you have to constantly reset and reexamine. And it is recognizing the links to the social categories that students inhabit, the identities that they bring with them, the bodies that they live in, the different abilities and disabilities. And it’s actually a place where, when you really engage this work in a meaningful way, I think it has the potential to make you kind of a better human being. Because you have to constantly say, “Gosh, why did I do that? What is it that my expectation was? Why am I having such a hard time with this particular student, finding something that they’re smart at, something that they’re really good at?” ‘Cause that’s the question. That’s the asset orientation question. You look at your students and you say, “What is it that they are smart about? How are they smart? I understand that school values this; I understand that my assessments value this; but what are they smart at? And how could I bring that into the meaningful work of my classroom?” Which is a very hard question sometimes.

Dan Meyer (16:03):

Yeah. Oh, so many thoughts here. Like one, I just feel like it’s such a value for teachers, for anyone, to have a big, clear, unanswerable-in-your-lifetime question to motivate your work in teaching. If you don’t have that, then the job is too small, basically. So I love that it’s a question that offers ways to dig in every single day. Every interaction is an opportunity, and it will never be answered. That’s wonderful. I love how I just feel like there’s…sometimes we have conversations with Lounge guests, Bethany, where it really gets out of the realm of the school. And it starts to creep on in to the personal life. It starts to creep on in to the spiritual life. And I find, with this sort of idea—the value of a human being—I feel when I have an asset orientation towards my key relationship in my life—my best friends, my spouse, all these things—that that’s an indication to me of a really big and valuable idea. And the question of the difference between growth mindset and asset orientation, I wonder if it’s relevant here that a growth mindset is a concept that was studied and originated by an education psychologist, Carol Dweck, and you are someone who operates with a social-cultural frame that considers more than the student’s mind in the unit of a student, but like what is going on and what are Bethany’s students perceiving in that moment you described, Bethany, that was you and a student, but everyone kind of feels what’s going on. I wonder if that’s a useful differentiator here. Do you have any thoughts about that?

Lani Horn (17:30):

Yes. I do think that the anthropological perspective that I take—where I really look at the cultural sources of these perspectives and these expectations and narratives, I would say, about who can learn math—are really, really important. And they’re part of what sometimes becomes invisible in the classroom. Though those are a really, really important part of the ongoing work of developing an asset orientation. And of course, I come to it from my own personal experience. I was an undergraduate math major. And sometimes by the time I got to my senior seminars, I was the only woman in the room. And you know, I felt that. I felt the stigma of low expectations. I felt the missed opportunities to dig deeper because people were trying to protect me from being wrong and embarrassing myself. And so on. So it’s personal. And of course we see this applying to other social categories as well. We know that the bias is not just against women in math, but people of color, against people with different kinds of abilities, and so on. So I think that that’s why it’s sort of this ongoing personal work. And I think, too, that we will inevitably in the course of committing ourselves to this find students who challenge us, especially in our society right now, the way things are so fractured. You know, what if you have a student in your classroom who holds political views that you find really odious? How do you find a way to engage that student in a way that respects what they do have to offer to your class, while also making sure that the class is a safe place for everybody? I mean, those are really, really complex dynamics to manage. And, you know, I can talk a lot about that too.

Dan Meyer (19:30):

What a job; what a job. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:33):

I was really struck, too, because I feel, like Dan said, we’ve gotten the posters. And not to undermine the power of growth mindset—I think it has impacted many, many students and communities—but it sometimes stops there. The conversation stops there. Well, you know, we have a chant we do every day. We have the poster on the wall. My students have a growth mindset. And I think what I really appreciated in your talk, and as I’ve learned about your work, is the invitation to teachers to be vulnerable and to really look at… I do feel like even sharing that story, you put a certain amount of vulnerability of, like, have I failed in some way? But I care about my students. I’m committed to cultivating a safe space. So I guess something I’m really curious about is: what do you think needs to happen or needs to be possible for teachers to further cultivate an asset orientation? Because even the ability to pause and to be reflective, sometimes it doesn’t seem possible. So I think it’s beyond just the teacher, but in the school, the district…what are some things you feel?

Lani Horn (20:49):

Are you letting me be the queen of designing schools? ‘Cause that’s a job I’ve always wanted! <laugh> OK. So if I were the queen of designing schools, teachers would have fewer student contacts.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:04):

Say more.

Lani Horn (21:05):

When I taught high school, I had sometimes…I think the most I got was 180 student contacts a day.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:12):

Wow.

Lani Horn (21:13):

So when you’re looking at 180 kids a day, that is just sort of a capacity issue. How am I supposed to really look meaningfully at each of those individual people and find what’s valuable and strong and smart about each of them? I think that in the U.S., teachers have more instructional time than any other developed country. We need more planning time. Because that’s an opportunity to consult with colleagues. Sometimes when we encounter students where we do have that personal struggle of, “Oh, gosh, I am really having a hard time connecting with you and seeing your strengths,” wouldn’t it be great to be able to go to their last year’s teacher or their English teacher or some other teacher and say, “Can you tell me about your experiences with this student? Because I’m really wanting to connect and I’m having trouble.” And wouldn’t that be wonderful if we had resources to do that? The other thing I would do is I would get rid of a lot of the meaningless accountability, which I have found has only amplified sort of the sorting, and sort of put a technocratic veneer over kids’ deficit thinking about their own selves. Kids get a printout saying that they’re “below basic” and you say, “Hey, that was a really good idea!” And they don’t believe you ’cause they have this printout that puts them in a different category, so there’s no way they could be good at math. So I think we’ve really done a lot of harm in the annual testing of kids in that way. Especially with the individual reporting. And often the metrics we’re using to do that are not designed to be disaggregated to the individual level. So we have a lot of measurement problems. I’m kind of going back to your question before, Dan, about what’s the difference between growth mindset and an asset orientation. I think that sometimes—I don’t think this is the way Carol Dweck intended it, but I think sometimes—and I’ve seen her rebut the way it’s been used in schools—but I think sometimes the way that growth mindset has been used in schools kind of brings it back to an individual problem: “We don’t have unequal funding in our school system! We don’t have systemic racism! We don’t have childhood poverty and malnourishment! It’s just about having the right mindset!” And we know that all of those other things have a huge impact on who engages in school and who’s able to get access to schooling and the formal learning that goes on there. And so there’s a little bit of an erasure that happens in the way that growth mindset has been taken up, and putting the onus back on students and teachers as opposed to going, “Wow, we’re in this system where the cards are stacked a certain way, and I have to somehow navigate that as a teacher and figure out how to hold you up in a system that is trying to push you down.” Which is a really different kind of job than to put a poster on my wall and do a chant in the morning.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:39):

And I’m wondering, if you were looking at how you would hope that asset orientation gets brought into the classroom…it’s not another poster, right? What do you think would really help make some meaningful change around the way we think about that and teachers and systems take that on?

Lani Horn (24:59):

So I think that the important thing is helping teachers develop a vocabulary for recognizing students’ mathematical strengths in particular. Recognizing a strength is not, “Wow, you did really neat work!” or “You have really nice handwriting!” Those are not authentically mathematical strengths, right? So I try to think about—ah, for color theorem, “How cool! What a great way to be systematic!” You know, that being systematic, developing a good representation, asking a good question, asking the next “what if,” all of these are profoundly mathematical ways of thinking. And there’s more—I’m just giving you a few examples—that are not always recognized in classrooms that are built around quick and accurate calculation. Right? When that is the most valued form of smartness, kids who can do all these other great things, like, “Wow, that that is such a clear way of explaining the connection between that graph and that equation! I love it. That helps me see what’s happening every time that variable increases.” You know? I love when kids do that! That’s not quick and accurate calculation, right? One of the most heartbreaking things I’ve seen sometimes is teachers doing a really good job of pumping kids up and helping them feel mathematical and seeing their mathematical strengths in the everyday lessons…but then they get a standard assessment and are told they’re a C student. How do you support the messaging you’re doing in your teaching and in your interactions so that it aligns with assessment? And this is where the sorting mechanism of school kind of inhibits some of the ways that we really should be valuing kids in a way that would support their ongoing learning and their own particular flourishing.

Dan Meyer (26:59):

I love how you describe this whole process as a career-long trajectory, how one does not ever finish creating an asset orientation in oneself. I’m wondering if there is some way for teachers who are listening to start to experience, to enter into that kind of feedback loop, that experience, of what an asset orientation offers them and their students. Do you have some way for us to start digging in here? A challenge, if you will?

Lani Horn (27:24):

Yeah, sure. This is a process I learned from teachers I’ve worked with, so I did not make this up. It’s called a roster check. It’s where you take a roster of one of your classes, and you go through student by student and see if you can specifically name a way that that student is mathematically smart. And it’s a private exercise if you want it to be. And just sort of go through. And then for the students who you really struggle to name how they’re smart, step back and see if there’s some kind of a pattern. And when I’ve done this in PD, as an exercise, I’ve had teachers have some real light-bulb moments where they go, “Oh my gosh, I really don’t know the quiet girls in my classroom,” or “I really don’t know the multilingual learners in my classroom.” So they can sort of start to see a bias in who they’re interacting with and who’s been able to engage in ways that uncover what their unconscious bias might be. And sometimes it’s not unconscious bias. Sometimes it’s not necessarily a category like that. It’s just the kids who are more outspoken, the kids who are high achieving. It doesn’t have to necessarily be linked to an obvious social category. However, I do think that then what you can do with that list of kids who you don’t have a name for their strengths, is you can kind of take a couple of them a week and make that your project to really observe them a little more intentionally and a little more closely. Try mixing things up. Have a chat with them. Say, “Hey, so what do you like to do? What are the things that you like to do in the world? What are your hobbies?” So maybe you can start to get some insight that way. You can talk to other teachers. Most kids have something that they’re passionate about, something that animates them and wakes them up in the morning, and knowing that and finding ways to meaningfully tie that to their mathematical learning can be extremely powerful.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:35):

Lani. I love that idea, taking that time to reflect and allow yourself to be vulnerable as you take a look at your biases and how that’s impacting your classroom space. I have learned so much from our conversation. I know we’re just scratching the surface of the work that you do. So if folks want to learn more, want to continue engaging in these ideas, where can they find you, or where can they find more about your work?

Lani Horn (29:58):

I’m pretty active on Twitter. My handle is @ilana_horn. No “e” on that. And I’ve written a couple of books for teachers. One is called Motivated. Another is called Strength in Numbers. People can check those out.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:17):

I love it. For our listeners, we are thrilled to share this conversation with you, and we wanna hear how you take up this challenge: What do you uncover? What do you notice? What are you learning about an asset orientation? And you can share that by finding us on Twitter at @MTLshow, or you can also continue the conversation with us in our Facebook group, Math Teacher Lounge. We’re so excited to keep learning with you. And thanks for listening.

Lani Horn (30:42):

Bye! Thanks for having me.

Dan Meyer (30:44):

Bye, folks. Thank you.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Lani Horn says about math

“An asset orientation is looking for students’ strengths and trying to work from those strengths as a basis for your teaching. ”

– Lani Horn

Professor of Mathematics Education, Vanderbilt University Peabody College

Meet the guest

Lani Horn centers her research on ways to make authentic mathematics accessible to students, particularly those who have been historically marginalized by our educational system. Professor Horn focuses primarily on mathematics teaching in two ways. First, Professor Horn looks at classroom practices that engage the most students in high-quality mathematics. Second, Professor Horn views teaching as a contextually-embedded practice –  how school environments, communities, colleagues, and policies shape what is instructionally possible. All of this is unified through a pursuit to understand teacher learning as a situative phenomenon. Follow Professor Horn on Twitter.

A graphic with the text "Math Teacher Lounge with Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer" on colored overlapping circles.

About Math Teacher Lounge: The podcast

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Welcome, Math 1 Reviewers!

We’re honored to introduce you to Amplify Desmos Math California. We’re confident you’ll find this comprehensive program to be a powerful tool for bringing the vision of the California Math Framework to life in classrooms across the state.

Please start with the video on the right to learn how to navigate the program and access key features referenced within our submission. Below you’ll find additional resources to support your review.

Your Review Samples

As a curriculum that incorporates both print and digital resources, it’s important that you explore both our physical materials (delivered to you in grade-specific tubs) and our digital materials (accessible through our platform). We invite you to explore both types of resources using the instructions and tips below.

Print Samples

Your print samples should have arrived in grade-specific tubs with a copy of your Reviewer Binder contained within the Math 1 shipping box. As you begin the process of organizing your materials, please refer to the inventory checklist found inside the tub as well as within your Reviewer Binder.

Digital Samples

  • In order to access your digital samples, you’ll need to log into our platform using your unique login credentials found on a Digital Access Flyer inside of your Reviewer Binder. Once you have located the flyer:
    • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
    • Click “Log in with Amplify.”
    • Enter the username and password provided on your Digital Access Flyer.

Navigation Tips

Below you will find helpful tips for navigating Amplify Desmos Math California. We recommend reading these pages alongside the program’s print materials and digital experience to gain a deeper understanding of the program. 

Click the links below to read about navigating program features including:

Built for California

The Amplify Desmos Math California program is designed around the vision articulated in the California Mathematics Framework to enable all California students to become powerful users of mathematics. Our program incorporates the latest research in student learning, meaning that we:

  • Focus on the Big Ideas: Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. Big Ideas, like standards, are not considered in isolation. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons.
  • Center on open and engaging tasks: Amplify Desmos Math California is grounded in engaging tasks meant to address students’ often-asked question: “Why am I learning this?”  Students are invited into learning with low-floor, high-ceiling tasks that provide an entry point for all. Open tasks in Amplify Desmos Math California provide the space for students to try on multiple strategies and represent their thinking in different ways, and allow student explanation and discussion to serve as the center of the classroom. All lessons offer both print and digital representations of lessons.
  • Provide enhanced digital experiences: Amplify Desmos Math California includes digitally-enhanced lesson activities, incorporating interactive digital tools alongside print materials. These purposefully-placed resources allow students to visualize mathematical concepts, receive actionable feedback while practicing, encounter personalized learning support from an onscreen tutor, and engage in discussions about their thinking and approaches.
  • Treat core instruction and differentiation as integral partners: The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to lesson content and offer students the individualized support as they dive into the mathematics.

Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards

Standards Map

Linked here is the Standards Map for Amplify for Math 1.

Evaluation Criteria Map

Linked here is the Evaluation Criteria Map for Math 1. Please note that you will need to be logged into the digital platform to access the links in the Evaluation Criteria Map.

Standards of Mathematical Practice

Linked here is the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the Standards for Mathematical Practice at Math 1.

Drivers of Investigation and Content Connections

Amplify Desmos Math California incorporates the Drivers of Investigation (DIs) and Content Connection (CCs) throughout the program. Throughout the year, students engage with open and authentic tasks of varying durations — from lesson activities to unit-level Explore lessons and longer course-level Investigations. Every lesson and investigation opportunity is grounded around the why, how, and what of the learning experience, and helps teachers bring mathematical concepts to life. 

A chart with three columns: Drivers of Investigation, Standards for Mathematical Practice, and Content Connections. Each column lists related activities and skills.

California English Language Development Standards

Linked here is the alignment of Amplify Desmos Math California to the California English Language Development Standards for Math 1.

California Environmental Principles and Concepts

Select lessons, performance tasks, and investigations across grade levels in Amplify Desmos Math California are aligned to one or more of the California Environmental Principles and Concepts. Click this link to view how the California Environmental Principles and Concepts are represented in Amplify Desmos Math California Math 1.

Category 2: Program Organization

Amplify Desmos Math California thoughtfully combines conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application. Each lesson is designed to tell a story by posing problems that invite a variety of approaches before guiding students to synthesize their understanding of the learning goals.

Big Ideas

Amplify Desmos Math California’s courses, units, and lessons are centered around the Big Ideas. Big Ideas, like standards, are not considered in isolation. In addition to each unit and lesson’s focal Big Ideas, Amplify Desmos Math California also provides connections among the Big Ideas across units and lessons. Please refer to Keeping the Big Ideas at the Center, linked here, for the Amplify Desmos Math California Math 1 lesson design and alignment to the Big Ideas.

Program Structure

Amplify Desmos Math combines the best of problem-based lessons, intervention, personalized practice, and assessments into a coherent and engaging experience for both students and teachers.

A flowchart diagram showing "Screening and progress monitoring" linked to three phases: Core instruction, Integrated personalized learning, and Embedded Intervention, with daily support noted.

Lessons and units in Amplify Desmos Math California are designed around a Proficiency Progression, a model that steps out problem-based learning by systematically building students’ curiosity into lasting grade-level understanding.

Five steps for learning: 1. Activate prior knowledge, 2. Collaborate, 3. Refine ideas, 4. Guide to understanding, 5. Practice and extend for lasting understanding.

In the Proficiency Progression, lessons begin by activating students’ natural curiosity and offering opportunities to generate new ideas through collaboration. Teachers are then able to refine ideas through intentional facilitation and guide students to grade-level understanding, while students retain the ability to use different strategies and methods to show their comprehension of the content. Students are provided ample opportunities to develop lasting understanding.

Scope and Sequence

Below you can view the scope and sequence for Amplify Desmos Math California Math 1. 

Mathematics I syllabus: Unit 1 to Unit 7 across two volumes, covering various math topics with instructional, assessment, and optional days detailed for each unit.

Lesson Design and Structure

Infographic showing a learning process: Warm-Up, Activities, Synthesis, and Reinforcement. Activities aim to increase student understanding over time.

Amplify Desmos Math California is designed with a structured approach to problem-based learning that systematically builds on students’ curiosity and allows students to grapple with the Big Ideas of the California Framework. Every lesson activity is organized into a Launch, Monitor, Connect format.

Launch: The launch is a short, whole-class conversation that creates a need or excitement, provides clarity, or helps students connect their prior knowledge or personal experience, which ensures that everyone has access to the upcoming work.  

Monitor: As students work individually, in pairs, or in groups, teachers explore student thinking, ask questions, and provide support to help move the conversations closer to the intended math learning goal. 

Connect: Teachers connect students’ ideas to the key learning goals of the lesson, facilitating class discussions that help synthesize and solidify the Big Ideas 

Each lesson within Amplify Desmos Math California follows the same structure. 

Warm-Up: Every Amplify Desmos Math California lesson begins with a whole class Warm-Up. Warm-Ups are an invitational Instructional Routine intended to provide a social moment at the start of the lesson in which every student has an opportunity to contribute. Warm-Ups may build fluency or highlight a strategy that may be helpful in the current lesson or act as an invitation into the math of the lesson.

Lesson Activities: Each lesson includes one or two activities. These activities are the heart of each lesson. Students notice, wonder, explore, calculate, predict, measure, explain their thinking, use math to settle disputes, create challenges for their classmates, and more. Guidance is provided to help teachers launch, monitor, and connect student thinking over the course of the activity.

Synthesis and Show What You Know: The Synthesis is an opportunity for the teacher and students to pull all the learning of the lesson together into a lesson takeaway. Students engage in a facilitated discussion to consolidate and refine their ideas about the learning goals, and the teacher synthesizes students’ learning. Show What You Know is a daily assessment opportunity for students to show what they know about the learning goals and what they are still learning.

Practice and Differentiation: Daily practice problems for the day’s lesson are included both online and in the print Student Edition, including fluency, test practice, and spiral review.

Flowchart showing classroom activity timing: Warm-Up (5 min), Lesson Activities (30 min), Synthesis and Show What You Know (10 min), Practice and Differentiation (time varies).

Routines

Amplify Desmos Math California features a variety of lesson routines. Instructional routines and Math Language Routines (MLRs) are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition. Both are called out at point-of-use within the Teacher Edition and Teacher Presentation Screens. Below are the types of routines used throughout the Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum:

  • MLR1: Stronger and Clearer Each Time
  • MLR2: Collect and Display
  • MLR3: Critique, Correct, Clarify
  • MLR5: Co-Craft Questions
  • MLR6: Three Reads
  • MLR7: Compare and Connect
  • MLR 8: Discussion Supports
  • Decide and Defend
  • Notice and Wonder
  • Number Talk
  • Tell a Story
  • Think-Pair-Share
  • Which One Doesn’t Belong?

Category 3: Assessments

A variety of performance data in Amplify Desmos Math California provides evidence of student learning, while helping students bolster their skills and understanding.

Unit-Level Assessment

Amplify Desmos Math California has embedded unit assessments that offer key insights into students’ conceptual understanding of math. These assessments provide regular, actionable information about how students are thinking about and processing math, with both auto-scoring and in-depth rubrics that help teachers anticipate and respond to students’ learning needs.

Pre-Unit Check: Each unit begins with a formative assessment designed to identify the student skills that will be particularly relevant to the upcoming unit. This check is agnostic to the standards covered in the following unit and serves not as a deficit-based acknowledgment of what students do not know, but rather as an affirmation of the knowledge and skills with which students come in.

End-of-Unit Assessment: Students engage with rigorous grade-level mathematics through a variety of formats and tasks in the summative End-of-Unit Assessment. A combination of auto-scored (when completed digitally) and rubric-scored items provides deep insights into student thinking. All Amplify Desmos Math California End-of-Unit Assessments include two forms.

Sub-Unit Quizzes: Sub-Unit Quizzes are formative assessments embedded regularly in Math 1. In these checks, students are assessed on a subset of conceptual understandings from the unit, with rubrics that help illuminate students’ current understanding and provide guidance for responding to student thinking.

Performance Tasks: At the end of each unit there is a summative assessment performance task provided to evaluate students’ proficiency with the concepts and skills addressed in the unit. 

Lesson-Level Assessments

Amplify Desmos Math California lessons include daily moments of assessment to provide valuable evidence of learning for both the teacher and student. Beyond formative, summative, and benchmark assessments, students also have opportunities for self-reflection with Watch Your Knowledge Grow. Students take ownership of their learning by reflecting and tracking their progress before and after each unit.

Show What You Know: Each lesson has a daily formative assessment focused on one of the key concepts in the lesson. Show What You Know moments are carefully designed to minimize completion time for students while maximizing daily teacher insights to attend to student needs during the following class. 

Responsive Feedback™: Teachers have the ability to see and provide in-the-moment feedback as students progress through a digital lesson. Responsive Feedback motivates students and engages them in the learning process.

Diagnostic Assessment

Every grade level features an asset-based diagnostic assessment designed to be administered at the beginning of the year.  Delivered digitally and to the whole class, our diagnostic assessment is uniquely designed to reveal underlying math thinking and identify what students know about grade-level math. With data beyond just right and wrong, teachers have the type of deeper level of insights need to take the right next step.

CAASPP-Aligned Assessment Preparation

Amplify Desmos Math is designed to support students’ mathematical development through problem-based learning, differentiation, and embedded assessments. The program’s emphasis on conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application aligns with the mathematical practices and content standards assessed by the CAASPP.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a CAASPP-aligned Item Bank. This standards-aligned bank of questions allows teachers to filter and search by grade and standard to find items. Once assigned on the digital platform, students will experience CAASPP-like practice with the online digital tools.

Data and Reporting

Amplify Desmos Math California provides teachers and administrators with unified reporting and insights so that educators have visibility into what students know about grade-level math—and can plan instruction accordingly for the whole class, small groups, and individual students. Reporting functionality integrates unit assessments, lesson assessments, diagnostic data, and progress monitoring for a comprehensive look at student learning. Program reports show proficiency and growth by domain, cluster, standard, and priority concept using performance data from unit assessments, then highlight areas of potential student need to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support.

Administrator reporting provides a complete picture of student, class, and district performance, allowing administrators to implement instructional and intervention plans.

Category 4: Access and Equity

The Amplify Desmos Math California curriculum provides teachers with lessons, strategies, and resources to eliminate barriers and increase access to grade-level content without reducing the mathematical demand of tasks. Our lessons are developed using the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to proactively ensure that all learners can access and participate in meaningful, challenging learning opportunities.

Every activity has multiple entry points to ensure that all students are supported and challenged. Intervention and personalized learning activities are directly connected to the day’s content and offer students the individualized supports they need to be successful.

Each lesson and unit contains guidance for teachers on how to identify students who may need support, students who need to keep strengthening their understanding, and students who may be ready to stretch their learning. In addition, teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students.

Universal Design for Learning

Each lesson in the program incorporates opportunities for engagement, representation, action, and expression based on the guidelines of Universal Design for Learning (UDL).

  • Multiple Means of Engagement: Students engage in both print and digital learning, and are regularly participating in discussions and hands-on activities. Students are invited to build their own challenge for other students to solve, which provides opportunities for choice and
    autonomy, as well as joy and play.
  • Multiple Means of Representation: Students are encouraged to demonstrate their learning using mathematical representations, both print and digital, and regularly engage with their peers in analyzing multiple possible solutions. Classes engage in open-ended discussions about what individual students notice and wonder about mathematical concepts.
  • Multiple Means of Action and Expression: Learners differ in how they navigate learning environments and express what they know. Students can communicate their ideas in multiple ways, including in print, sketching, uploading photos, or recording an audio response.

Accessibility

Every lesson includes at least one specific suggestion the teacher can use to increase access to the lesson without reducing the mathematical demand of the tasks. These suggestions address the following areas:

  • Conceptual Processing
  • Visual-Spatial Processing
  • Executive Functioning
  • Memory and Attention
  • Fine Motor Skills

Students have the ability to control accessibility tools so that each learning experience is customized to their individual needs. In many instances, these tools can be turned on or off at any point of instruction.

  • Text to speech: Reads text instructions to students in multiple languages
  • Enlarged font: Increases the size of all text on screen
  • Braille mode: Includes narration of digital interactions
  • Language selection: Toggles between languages

Differentiation: In-Lesson Teacher Moves

Within every lesson activity, teachers can use the suggestions in the Differentiation Teacher Moves table to provide in-the-moment instructional support while students are engaged in the work of the lesson. This table can help teachers anticipate the ways students may approach the activity, and provides prompts that they can use during the lesson to Support, Strengthen, and Stretch individual students in their thinking. Teachers are provided with clear student actions and understanding to look for, each matched with immediately usable suggestions for how to respond to the student thinking illustrated in each row of the table. In addition to using these suggestions in the moment as teachers monitor student work, teachers can review the Differentiation table in advance to help them anticipate how students are likely to approach the activity.

A differentiation guide for Lesson 3 showing strategies for support, strengthen, and stretch, plus a section on math language development resources, all in a structured layout.

Differentiation: Beyond the Lesson

Teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students needing support, strengthening, and stretching after each lesson. Support, Strengthen, and Stretch resources include:

  • Mini-Lessons: 15-minute, small-group direct instruction lessons targeted to a specific concept or skill
  • Item Banks: Space for teachers to create practice and assessments by using filters and searching for standards, summative-style items, and more
  • Fluency Practice: Adaptive, personalized practice built out for basic operations and more
  • Extensions: Lesson-embedded Teacher Moves including possible stretch questions and activities for students
  • Lesson Practice: Additional practice problems support every lesson
  • Math Adventures: Strategy-based math games where students engage with math concepts and practice skills in a fun digital environment
  • Lesson Summary Support: Support for students and caregivers that provides efficient explanation of the learning goal with clear examples

Math Identity and Community

The Math Identity and Community feature supports teachers in helping students build confidence in their own mathematical thinking, develop skills to work with and learn from others when doing math, and learn how math is an interwoven part of their broader community. The embedded prompts throughout the lessons are designed to highlight what it means to be good at math, the value of sharing ideas, and the power of flexible and creating thinking. Here are some examples of the Math Identity and Community supports embedded in each lesson:

  • I can be all of me in math class. You will work with partners every day in math class. What do you want your partners to know about you? 
  • We are a math community. What does good listening look like and sound like in a math community? 
  • I am a doer of math. What math strengths did you use today?

Math Language Development

Every lesson in Amplify Desmos Math California includes opportunities for all students to develop mathematical language as they experience the content. Amplify Desmos Math California purposefully progresses language development from lesson to lesson and across units by supporting students in making their arguments and explanations stronger, clearer, and more precise. This systematic approach to the development of math language can be broken down into the following four categories of support:

  • Vocabulary: Units and lessons start by surfacing students’ language for new concepts, then building connections between their language and the new vocabulary for that unit. This honors the language assets that students bring into their learning.
  • Language Goals: Language goals attend to the mathematics students are learning, and are written through the lens of one or more of four language modalities: reading, writing, speaking, and listening.
  • Math Language Routines: Math Language Routines are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition.
  • Multilingual/English Learner Supports: Supports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentional points within each lesson. These specific, targeted suggestions support ML/ELs with modifications that increase access to a task, or through development of contextual or mathematical language (both of which can be supportive of all learners). 

Multilingual and English Learner Supports

Amplify partnered with the English Learner Success Forum (ELSF), a national nonprofit organization that advocates for high-quality instructional materials that are inclusive of multilingual learners. ELSF reviewed Amplify Desmos Math California, and provided directional guidance and feedback to ensure that the program reflects their research-based instructional strategies for multilingual/English learners.

Our Math Language Development Resources book contains lesson-specific strategies and activities for all levels of English Learners (i.e., Emerging, Expanding, Bridging). With support for every lesson, teachers are empowered to help all students, regardless of their language skills, to participate fully, grasp the material, and excel in their mathematical journey.

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a digital glossary for languages other than Spanish. Translations will be provided for up to nine languages.

Amplify Desmos Math California will include Spanish student-facing materials beginning in the 2026–27 school year.

Category 5: Instructional Planning and Support

Amplify Desmos Math California includes a variety of embedded instructional supports to empower teachers to lead effectively and gain actionable insights into student growth and progress. Teachers are equipped with a comprehensive set of resources designed to fulfill the requirements of Category 5.

Within the Teacher Edition front matter:

  • Scope and sequence
  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Unit and Sub-Unit Overview:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Math that Matters Most
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

Within each Lesson:

  • Big Ideas, Drivers of Investigation, and Content Connections
  • Grade level standards
  • Standards for Mathematical Practice
  • English Language Development Standards
  • Environmental Principals and Concepts

At the course level (within the Teacher Edition front matter):

  • Navigating the Program (both print and digital)
  • Facilitating Lesson Activities with Launch, Monitor and Connect
  • Overview of the Digital Facilitation Tools

At the lesson level:

  • Suggestions for timing
  • What materials to prep
  • How to organize and group students 
  • Key lesson takeaways with the Synthesis
  • Recommendations for Differentiation
  • Strategies for intervention and extensions (in the Intervention, Extensions, and Investigation Resources book)

At the activity level:

  • Differentiation recommendations
  • Accessibility tips
  • ML / EL tips
  • Teacher look-fors
  • Recommended Teacher Moves
  • Prompts for guiding student thinking 
  • Sample student responses

A variety of language development supports are provided within the Student and Teacher Editions and Math Language Development Resources book.

At the lesson level:

  • Diagrams and visuals
  • Sentence frames and word banks
  • Graphic organizers, including Frayer models
  • Vocabulary routines
  • Embedded language supports aligned to the CA ELDs
  • Lesson-specific strategies for Emerging, Expanding, and Bridging

At the unit level: 

  • Words With Multiple Meanings
  • Contextual vocabulary

At the course level:

  • English/Spanish cognates
  • Multilingual Glossary
  • Additional Practice Resources book
  • Assessment Resources book 
  • Assess and Respond guidance paired with each assessment opportunity
  • Show-What-You-Know activities
  • Answer keys and rubrics 
  • Performance tasks

Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts, 2nd Edition, given Tier 1 Rating in Louisiana

New York, NY – (May 30, 2018) Amplify, a company that creates next-generation curriculum and assessment programs, announced today that Louisiana rated the second edition of Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (Amplify CKLA) as Tier 1, the top rating in the state. Amplify CKLA is the only K–5 Tier 1 ELA program in Louisiana that includes foundational skills.

Amplify CKLA is a comprehensive curriculum that brings a proven, systematic approach to foundational skills together with knowledge-rich reading, writing, speaking, and listening activities. Based on widely recognized cognitive science and reading research, Amplify CKLA offers two distinct strands (knowledge and skills) for grades K–2 and integrates them into one for grades 3–5.

Amplify CKLA 1st Edition materials had been previously listed as Tier 1 in Louisiana. According to the Louisiana Department of Education website, Tier 1 materials exemplify quality, meet all non-negotiable criteria, and scored the best possible on all indicators of superior quality.

“We are thrilled that Louisiana recognized the strength of Amplify CKLA and gave it a Tier-1 rating,” said Alexandra Clarke, senior vice president and general manager of ELA curriculum at Amplify. “Many educators in Louisiana have seen exciting progress in their classrooms with Amplify CKLA, and we hope that this Tier-1 rating will enable more schools in the state to bring the world to their students with our knowledge-rich curriculum.”

About Amplify
A pioneer in K-12 education since 2000, Amplify is leading the way in next-generation curriculum and assessment. Our captivating core and supplemental programs in ELA, math, and science engage all students in rigorous learning and inspire them to think deeply, creatively, and for themselves. Our formative assessment products turn data into practical instructional support to help all students build a strong foundation in early reading and math. All of our programs provide teachers with powerful tools that help them understand and respond to the needs of all their students. Today, Amplify serves more than three million students in all 50 states. For more information, visit amplify.com.

Contact: media@amplify.com

We are middle school.

Amplify ELA was designed to respond to the distinct opportunities and challenges faced by middle school students and teachers. It was conceived to support middle school students at this critical developmental moment.

The program helps teachers ensure that skills are taught, standards are covered, and the test is prepped—and it does this work in the background so that teachers can spend their time bringing text to life and providing each student the right instruction at the right time. Request a sample to take a closer look.

Illustrated scene with people in various poses, including a person holding a mask and a child looking up at butterflies. Background includes abstract shapes and an outdoor setting.

Overview

A teacher stands in front of a classroom while students, seated at desks with laptops, raise their hands eagerly.

Amplify ELA is a blended curriculum designed for middle school students and teachers. It provides:

  • An engaging digital program with comprehensive print materials, including Teacher Editions, Student Editions, and Writing Journals for grades 6–8.
  • A year’s worth of instruction for each grade.
  • Complex, content-rich literary and informational texts.
  • Differentiation that supports all students with reading complex texts, and an interactive eReader with an array of multimedia tools.
  • Embedded assessments that allow for uninterrupted instructional time.
  • The Amplify Library—a digital collection of more than 650 full-length texts.

Why Amplify?

We designed every Amplify ELA lesson to help teachers teach the essential skills of reading, writing, speaking, and listening, in a classroom where students thrive academically, socially, and emotionally.

We use six proven pedagogical approaches to help teachers build a literate community in every middle school classroom:

Middle school collaboration

1. Critical and collaborative engagement

With Amplify ELA, students engage with learning because they engage with each other. Amplify ELA fosters a classroom community that thrives on a wide range of student observations. The lessons immerse students in interactive close reading activities and cognitively challenging work, and keep them engaged through a variety of collaborative activities.

2. Integrated approach to target all standards

Every lesson requires students to work across multiple learning objectives—reading, writing, speaking, and listening—while focusing on one primary standard. Result: students work with complex texts that demand working across standards, while receiving instruction focused on building a specific skill.

Middle school standards
Middle school texts

3. Text at the center

Amplify puts complex text at the center of every lesson and activity to develop the critical capacities and build the vocabulary, knowledge, and skills students need to succeed in middle school, high school, and beyond. Great texts spark curiosity, reveal layered meanings, reflect a diversity of perspectives and identities, and cultivate meaningful conversation and reflection.

4. Multimodal and strategic technology

Activities harness multiple learning modes, using media tools, digital apps, and a variety of visual and physical experiences to strategically support and enhance student learning.

Middle school engagement
Middle school differentiation

5. High expectations and strong supports

Strong supports built in at all levels give every student a chance to meet the highest possible expectations. Struggling readers, students ready for advanced work, English language learners: all can take on the challenge of rigorous work while data delivery and digital tools allow teachers to ensure progress.

6. Timely feedback and actionable data

Formative assessment measures and targeted feedback tools are embedded in every lesson. Result: teachers can make timely decisions about instructional strategy and provide the guidance students need to thrive as readers and writers.

Middle school assessments

What teachers say

What teachers are saying about Amplify ELA

“It was engaging for students, fun and easy to teach, and led to deeper discussions and written responses than I have seen in a long time! The embedded differentiation helped ensure students had just the right amount of challenge/supports. I wish I had this earlier in my teacher career!”

Ashley

Teacher

What teachers are saying about Amplify ELA

“Amplify has put it all together in one place so we can hook our kids with engaging material, then track how well they’re performing.

Brent

Principal

What teachers are saying about Amplify ELA

“Amplify uses technology to enhance best practices, not instead of best practices. It is multimodal and encourages movement, readers theater, writing, drawing, etc… It isn’t just a series of copied pdfs and worksheets made digital.”

Karen

Teacher

Blended model

Amplify ELA’s new blended curriculum can be used in classrooms with limited access to devices, allowing teachers to make choices about when their students use devices without compromising learning or full standards coverage.
Amplify ELA’s blended approach keeps a strong connection between print and digital by having the teacher project uniquely digital moments as students work in their print Student Editions and Writing Journals. This approach works when Wi-Fi or devices are unavailable for both brief or extended periods of time.

Amplify ELA Teacher Components
Amplify ELA Student Components

Try Amplify ELA

Ready to take a closer look at Amplify ELA? No problem. Just complete the form to get immediate access to:

  • Digital: trial that includes two units per grade level
  • Print: preview of Teacher Edition
Amplify ELA trial

What is the Science of Reading?

Diagram illustrating the pathways of language comprehension and word recognition merging into skilled reading, with processes becoming increasingly strategic or automatic.

The Science of Reading is a large body of research that helps answer a key question about the human experience: How do people learn to read?

It also helps answer a fundamental question for educators: How should we teach reading?

The Science of Reading draws on decades of research from fields like cognitive science, neuroscience, linguistics, psychology, and education. This vast (and still growing) body of research describes our up-to-date understanding of what reading requires, and therefore shapes our approach to effective literacy instruction.

Two frameworks are widely used to capture and communicate those core takeaways:

  • The Simple View of Reading
  • The Reading Rope

In this overview, we’ll walk you through both.

Why reading needs science

Spoken language develops naturally. Children typically learn to understand and use language simply by being around other people who talk.

Reading, on the other hand, works differently. Written language is a human invention; our brains did not evolve to read. When we are born, the parts of our brain that see letters are completely separate from the parts that hear sounds. So to become readers, students require explicit instruction. They have to be taught specifically to build new connections between what they see on the page and the language they already know.

For a brain to read words, it needs to create new pathways that connect letters with sounds. For example, when a child sees the letter “f” and connects it to the /f/ sound in “funny,” their brain builds a new bridge between the areas that handle sight and sound. Reading actually rewires the brain, bringing together the regions for vision, speech, sound, and meaning into one coordinated reading system.

The Science of Reading explains what those new connections involve—and why some students need more support than others to build them.

The Simple View of Reading

At the heart of the Science of Reading is one of the most widely accepted frameworks in reading research: the Simple View of Reading, first proposed by experts Philip Gough and Bill Tunmer in the 1980s.

The Simple View answers a basic question: What has to be in place for a reader to understand a text?

According to the Simple View, reading comprehension depends on two essential components:

  • Decoding: the ability to turn written words into spoken language
  • Language comprehension: the ability to understand the meaning of that language

Both are necessary, and neither works on its own. One reader may decode words accurately but struggle to understand what they read, while another may understand spoken language well but be unable to read the words on the page. In either case, comprehension breaks down.

The Simple View captures this core finding of reading research: Skilled reading depends on both word reading and language understanding working together.

Decoding: Reading the words on the page

Decoding involves learning how letters and letter patterns represent sounds. This task is complex in alphabetic writing systems like English, where many letters represent more than one sound, and many sounds can be spelled in different ways.

When children begin learning to read, they already understand a great deal of spoken language. What they don’t yet understand is written language. Letters and printed words are unfamiliar in a way that speech is not.

As students practice decoding, they become more accurate and more fluent. Over time, decoding becomes increasingly automatic.

And this automaticity matters—when students no longer have to focus most of their attention on reading the words, they can devote more mental energy to understanding what the text means.

Language comprehension: Understanding what you read

Language comprehension includes vocabulary, knowledge about the world, and an understanding of how language works across sentences and texts.

Research shows that what readers already know plays a major role in comprehension. As shown in the baseball experiment, students understood and remembered more when the text described a familiar activity—even when their reading skills were relatively weak.

When students read about unfamiliar topics, comprehension becomes more difficult. This is true even for students who can read the words on the page accurately.

So what’s the best way to teach reading comprehension? Combine both elements of the Simple View. In other words, reading comprehension grows alongside vocabulary and knowledge, and exposure to a wide range of topics supports reading development.

The Reading Rope

The Simple View of Reading identifies what reading requires, while the Reading Rope reflects how those requirements develop and become integrated over time.

The Reading Rope organizes reading into two broad strands:

  • Word recognition, which includes phonological awareness, decoding, and fluent word reading
  • Language comprehension, which includes vocabulary, background knowledge, and the ability to make meaning from text

Each strand of the Rope is made up of multiple interconnected skills. With effective instruction and practice, these skills become more coordinated and more automatic. As that happens, reading becomes smoother and less effortful, allowing readers to focus more fully on meaning.

The Reading Rope builds on the Simple View by showing how skilled reading emerges as these components strengthen and work together.

Instructional practices: Putting it all to work

The Science of Reading is the broad body of research on how reading develops, and the Simple View of Reading and Reading Rope capture the core takeaways of that research.

Together, they show that skilled reading depends on both accurate word reading and strong language comprehension, and that these abilities develop through explicit and systematic instruction, practice, and growing knowledge over time.

For educators, this understanding provides the strongest possible foundation for reading instruction. When students become skilled readers, new possibilities open up—in their classrooms today, and for the rest of their lives.

This is one of the best things I have ever worked on.

A man in a white shirt is smiling in a circular frame, with illustrations of a person swimming and a submarine on a light blue background, capturing the lively spirit of Amplify Desmos Math and engaging classroom discussions.

Every discussion teaches kids about math—and about themselves.

Among many other reasons, discussions are important because they’re moments when the teacher assigns value to students. In a discussion, the teacher says, “Hey—I have precious little time to teach what I know. Still, I’m going to dedicate some of that time for you to share and talk about what you know.” That’s a moment when students learn about math, but also that their own ideas have value.

Discussions are difficult, and “more wait time” is rarely the reason.

There are a few reasons why discussions frequently fail, and it’s rarely because the teacher didn’t give students enough “wait time” to respond, as is commonly believed.

1. The question was hard to understand or find your way into. For a long time, I’d ask my kids at dinner, “How was your day? What happened?” And my kids wouldn’t have much to say. Lately, I ask them to tell me two things about their day that happened and one thing that didn’t, and we all guess which was which. It’s an easier prompt, one that kids can find their way into with ease and then use as a launching pad into a larger conversation.

2. There isn’t enough to talk about. If your math class consists of a lot of binary, right/wrong questions, what is there for anyone to talk about? “A lot of us got this one wrong. Here’s a pie chart that shows how wrong we were. How about I show you how to do it?” That’s fine, but it isn’t a discussion, and it’s quite often a very dreary classroom environment for children.

A digital dashboard displays multiple financial charts, graphs, and filters—including pie charts and bar graphs—similar to those used in Amplify Desmos Math for middle school math classroom discussions on project profitability and billing.

In Amplify Desmos Math, a curriculum I work on, kids generally have plenty to talk about. Our interactives stir a kid’s imagination for even the most abstract areas of math. For example, this submarine interactive stirs up a kid’s ideas about adding positive and negative integers.

A yellow submarine with five round windows, each filled with a blue dot—perfect for sparking classroom discussions in middle school math. Red and blue dots sit above and below the windows, plus an anchor and lightbulb icon on the left.

And then we ask kids, “Hey, what do you think about the star at +5? Can you come up with something that none of your classmates do?”

A digital lesson in Amplify Desmos Math shows a submarine at position 0 and a star labeled 5; instructions prompt students to collect the star using unique actions, sparking engaging middle school math classroom discussions.

Let me tell you: Kids accept that challenge.

3. There is too much to talk about.

This is a good problem to have, but it’s still a problem. In the class screenshotted below, 25 students have put 300 thoughtful words in front of the teacher, every response different from every other!

A highlighted text box shows Sofia Kovalevskaya saying, "I want to add 1000 floats and then 995 anchors!!!" against a background of faded text—perfect for sparking middle school math classroom discussions with Amplify Desmos Math.

Teachers now have a problem of abundance, not scarcity. They have to decide which responses to select, and why, in an environment of cognitive overload.

This is very hard work for teachers, especially novices, especially teachers who lack mathematical content knowledge, especially teachers who are hanging onto the school year by their fingernails.

We offer teachers lots of different support for discussions throughout our curriculum—both in print and digital activities—but our new discussion support for digital activities is first-of-its-kind and best-in-class.

Discussion Moments.

  1. Student responses stream into the teacher’s dashboard.
  2. A message appears: “Analyzing Student Responses.”
  3. Shortly after, the message changes: “Open Discussion Moment.
A green banner with the text "Analyzing student responses" and two sparkles, next to a gray computer monitor icon—perfect for facilitating Classroom discussions in middle school math with Amplify Desmos Math.

You click the message and see a classroom-ready discussion screen.

A submarine aims for a star 5 units up; students suggest combinations of floats and anchors to reach it. Amplify Desmos Math sparks engaging classroom discussions as a sidebar asks, "Are they all correct?.

First, you see four student responses, each one authored by a student in the class, each one interesting on its own. This was not luck. Those responses were curated by a large language model at the direction of our curriculum experts. “Find three responses that capture the star in different ways,” our experts prompted the AI. “Responses that add anchors. That remove anchors. Find one response that might not capture the star.”

Next to those responses you see a question: ”Which one is not like the others?” That question feels surprisingly well-matched for this math and for those student responses. This, also, isn’t an accident. Curriculum experts made that decision.

You click the right arrow and see a suggested narration for the Discussion Moment, narration which was authored, again, by our human authors for this particular problem, to help novices learn to facilitate productive discussions in math.

That’s a “Discussion Moment.”

In the past, coaches, experts, and publishers have all asked teachers to . . .

  • Select and sequence student responses.
  • Construct a student-facing discussion resource.
  • Lead the conversation.

Now we are asking teachers to . . .

  • Lead the conversation.

In our experience, computers do quite well with the first two jobs while teachers obliterate computers at the work of leading a conversation, at connecting student ideas, at asking one kid what they think of another kid’s idea, at pulling ideas out of a kid who maybe doesn’t think they have ideas to offer. Discussion Moments delegate to humans and computers the best work for each of them.

Discussion Moments are different.

Lots of edtech companies are putting AI to work in lots of different ways. Discussion Moments are unique.

First, they’re designed to work through rather than around the teacher, during class rather than outside of class. They’re designed to support social interactions between students and teachers in the moment of instruction. This is the action.

Second, this is a classroom-ready resource. So many AI applications just output a ChatGPT-style resource. Lots of text. Several main bullets. Lots of sub-bullets. An emoji or two. And I am very sorry, but they are not useful in class. The teacher has to read all of that text, copy and paste and edit it, and then construct the student-facing resource all in the middle of class. That’s fantasyland, folks. At Amplify, we have, instead, created a one-click, classroom-ready resource.

Third, we’ve fortified these digital Discussion Moments with gallons of human expertise. Since December, I’ve worked with several of our curriculum experts—Casey Nelson, Brian Kam, and Tom Snarsky—and for every problem across several units of middle school math, they:

  • Reviewed thousands of student responses to each problem.
  • Identified thematic trends in the student responses.
  • Decided whether or not those themes demand a discussion.
  • Decided which of several discussion frames would be most appropriate, given those themes.
  • Wrote an AI prompt specific to each problem to increase the odds that the large language model will curate useful student responses.
Screenshot of code-like text outlining three criteria for student responses, with bolded and underlined terms, labeled "human authored" at the top—ideal for guiding classroom discussions in middle school math or Amplify Desmos Math activities.

Most edtech companies would prefer to let AI lead this process from end to end, using the same prompt for every problem, even at the cost of the teacher and student experience. Meanwhile, we only ask AI to execute instructions and construct a resource. The nature of those instructions, the type of resource, and how it’s used—that is all determined by different humans and their expertise.

What do teachers and administrators think?

I ran a small-scale pilot of this feature last spring and kicked off a larger-scale pilot last week. A couple hundred teachers overall. I have never had an easier time recruiting teachers for a project than with this one. Every district math curriculum lead knows how challenging it is for teachers to lead discussions, and every one I asked was eager to support.

Two other examples of Discussion Moments.

Compare and Connect. We asked a large language model to locate responses that have one of a couple of important features but ideally not both. Then we constructed a Discussion Moment asking students to write a response that combines the best of both answers.

A scatter plot titled “Radius vs. Area” from Amplify Desmos Math prompts classroom discussions about proportional relationships, as middle school math students compare line types and notice the points do not form a straight line.

Critique, Correct, Clarify. Our curriculum authors noticed a frequent incorrect answer to a question. We told the LLM to watch out for it and frame it in a Discussion Moment where the class is asked to find value in the wrong answer before correcting it. Try to imagine what it does to a kid to hear their incorrect answer described as valuable.

A graph displays a purple straight line with negative slope crossing the y-axis at 4 and the x-axis at 8; text explains the equation y = -1/2x + 4, perfect for middle school math or engaging Amplify Desmos Math classroom discussions.

Wait—don’t you hate AI?

I get why you might ask me that, but no. I think generative AI is perhaps the most overrated education technology of my lifetime; I don’t think the chatbot tutors or lessonslop generators are going to transform K–12 education. But I do think generative AI is neat. And look, I have tried to support discussion work with K–12 teachers for the last ten years in other ways, too. I have run in-person and remote PD. I have written math lessons and teacher supports for those lessons. I have sent nifty little customized email sequences tailored to teacher usage. None of those supports have been as promising as AI is here. None of them has moved the needle like Discussion Moments because none of them has been able to meet teachers in their moment of need, at the point of use.

That’s it. You can find Discussion Moments in Amplify Desmos Math next school year.

S4 – 02. Bethany and Dan share their math biographies

Promotional graphic for "math teacher lounge," season 4 episode 2, featuring photos and names of math teaching guests Bethany Lockhart and Dan Meyer.

In this episode, co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer get personal and share their “math bios”—their early experiences with math and how those experiences turned them into the educators they are today.

Explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page

Download Transcript

Dan Meyer (00:00):

We’re recording. What’s up, everybody. This is Dan Meyer with Math Teacher Lounge.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:08):

And I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson. We are so excited to be back. Season Four, Episode Two. Hi, Dan.

Dan Meyer (00:16):

Hey, Bethany, how are you doing today?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:18):

I’m so excited to be talking with you! You know, as we record this, our reunion at NCTM is getting closer and closer.

Dan Meyer (00:28):

The NCTM live show is gonna be bonkers. I don’t think people are ready for it. You think you know what we’re about on MTL from listening to us, but the live show is gonna be outta control. You cannot imagine how many clowns and elephants Bethany wants to have at the live show. We’re still—we’re trying to talk her down from like three to one, but we’ll see.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:44):

All I want is the t-shirt cannon. Because I used to go to these baseball games and they would have a t-shirt cannon. And I thought, I wanna operate a t-shirt cannon! So like, if I could be standing on stage aiming t-shirts at people who are jumping up and down requesting a t-shirt? I don’t know. Doesn’t that sound fun?

Dan Meyer (01:01):

Sounds awesome. High point of my college education was catching a t-shirt. No, it was—it was a burrito. It was a burrito cannon. But I think it was just a t-shirt cannon, but it was a burrito cannon. And I caught a burrito at a game and it was probably the most memorable moment of all of college education for me.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:16):

Was the burrito still warm?

Dan Meyer (01:18):

Oh yeah. I think it got—like, I think it might’ve been warm at one point and then it got warmed back up through the muzzle velocity of the cannon. So it was a pretty great system they had going on there. <Laugh> Yeah. <Laugh> Anyway, I’m off topic, but, we’re thrilled to—I’m thrilled to chat with you and we’re thrilled to be listened to by you folks out there in MTL land. In the lounge itself. We got a fun show today.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:40):

So if you listen to Episode One—which if you haven’t, hope you go back and listen to it—if you listen to Season Four, Episode One, you’re gonna hear—we asked Huon, KT, who is this delight of a joyful teacher. We asked her to talk to us about what’s her math bio. And we want to ask all of our guests—like, I wanna go back and ask every single guest we’ve ever had to tell us their math bio.

Dan Meyer (02:06):

Yep.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:06):

Because, while seemingly simple in nature, our students enter our math classroom already having had this relationship with math and these notions about their role in math or what they think about math. And it impacts our school year with them if we’re a teacher. And it impacts our relationship with math as we move through our education and beyond. Right? And I I’m so excited about this question, ’cause I think it also ties into this theme for Season Four, which is joyful math, and diving into “When has math felt joyful? When has it not? Does it feel like—how do we think about how our math bio, our relationship with math, has evolved into a joyful or less joyful place?”

Dan Meyer (02:54):

I get it. And what’s really key here, I think, is that teaching more than other professions is a generational profession. You know what I’m saying? Like, no one is like, “Well, you know, I sold insurance to you and now you’re selling insurance to, you know, my grandkids; that’s amazing!” But people are always posting photos when, like, you teach someone who then becomes a teacher later. Teaching is a generational sort of thing. So the kinds of joyful experiences that we offer or don’t offer students now affect the experiences that students who haven’t even been born yet will have, you know, some 20, 30 years later. That, to me, is a trip. And well-worth exploring, you know, how we got here, mathematically speaking.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:39):

I remember a friend had sent me this image of an assignment that her son got that was asking for their Mathography. They wanted to know about their history of mathematics. And this was their first assignment. And this teacher, I would like to imagine, read them all and used it to inform conversations about students’ relationship with math. And, you know, some of the questions they asked were thinking about whether you consider yourself, quote, unquote, “good at math.” Like “what kind of experiences have you had? What do you like or dislike about math? What is, you know—what do you expect to learn in math this year?” Just asking students to actually pause and examine and reflect on their relationship and then also looking forward to, like, what kind of a classroom community do we wanna create? And I loved that assignment. And yeah, so today’s episode Dan, guess what?

Dan Meyer (04:32):

What’s going on? What’s happening?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:33):

I figured we should ask each other about our math bio.

Dan Meyer (04:39):

I think the people out there would love to know this about us. ‘Cause you know, we’re both awesome. But also what’s really cool here is that like, I don’t know this about you. Like not, not a lot. You know, the folks at Amplify, they kind of assembled me and Bethany together in the same way that record labels assembled pop boy bands, girl bands, that kind of thing, back in the day. You know, grabbing some stars from screen or film and just like throwing ’em together and saying, “All right, now you’re here to perform together.” And so it’s just a really good moment for us to, like, settle back and just know who we’ve been working with for the last three seasons and change here. I love it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:15):

Well, I don’t know. I don’t actually agree with that, Dan. Because don’t you remember? We knew each other beforehand. And while I would like to think of us as…oh, I’ll say One Direction—well, no, One Direction is now defunct. Who’s another band that got formed by one of those shows and is still together and still—

Dan Meyer (05:33):

BTS! K-Pop, you know! Let’s go!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:35):

K-pop. BTS.

Dan Meyer (05:38):

Let’s go, Bethany <laugh>.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:39):

So can we incorporate some K-pop into the NCTM Math Teacher Lounge live episode? Don’t answer now. Don’t answer now. OK. So not only are we gonna share our math bios, but we want to encourage you listeners to share your math bio with somebody in your life. It could be a child in your life, maybe talking to your kiddo about what was it like. What was math like for you? It could be a student that you have. It could be a partner, a friend, a parent. I mean, the sky’s the limit. Share your math bio. And most of all, share with us. We wanna hear about your math bio and you can share it with us at Twitter, at MTLShow, or in our Facebook group, Math Teacher Lounge.

Dan Meyer (06:26):

Stop on by, please. All right. I’m gonna just share like, just a couple of quick, signposts. Not the full bio. Gotta leave them wondering about something here. But here’s a few quick highlights and lowlights of my math bio and how, maybe, it made me the teacher that I was and the educator I am. Is that cool?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:44):

Wait, I didn’t even, I didn’t ask you yet.

Dan Meyer (06:46):

Ask me what?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:47):

Hey, Dan!

Dan Meyer (06:49):

Is there like a magical word? Like, what’s your math bio? <Laugh> Oh, go for it. No, no, that’s right. They won’t know what I’m talking about. Why is he talking about his math bio? Bethany—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:57):

That whole lead-in that we just gave? They might not know.

Dan Meyer (07:00):

Yeah. We just talked about math bios for the last 20 minutes. But yeah, they might not know what we’re—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:04):

<laugh> So Dan, why don’t you go first? ‘Cause I know you were gonna ask me to go first, but why don’t you go first? Dan? What’s your math bio?

Dan Meyer (07:12):

Oh, wow. Well, thank you for the formal invitation to share my math bio, Bethany Lockhart Johnson. So, I’ll just share—I just wanna share a couple items here, not the full history. Gotta leave ’em—leave a little mystery in there, you know what I’m saying? But here’s a few highlights and lowlights, and I think what it means for me as an educator. So, I was homeschooled for eight years. That was big—did a lot of math learning on my own. Couple of lowlights from that, a lot of highlights, in terms of just like being able to, like, learn at my own rate and just jump on ahead and pursue different wacky things. But I tried to switch into public school in fourth grade and I lasted, um, four hours. I didn’t even go to class. I enrolled and then it was like, boom, I was out of there. Because we went to the school; we met the teacher, saw the room, very nice person and place. But I got the homework assignment and the homework assignment was gibberish. I had no idea what to do and such was this feeling of just, like, despair and hopelessness, I was like, I cannot be a part of this. I remember the assignment. It was about identifying scalene, isosceles, and equilateral triangles. I’ll tell you this: I am quite good at that now. But at the time, like, I didn’t know what those words meant. And you know, at that moment we had Encyclopedia Britannica, could not Google this or even Ask Jeeves or AltaVista this so well back then. It just—it was an entry moment of failure and realizing that so much of math is like a, kind of a social kind of construct. And if you’re not part of that social circle, what can you do? So that was a bummer. Another bummer was eighth-grade math, learned it all by way of videotape. You know, put in the tape and watch—not gonna say the person’s name and not this person’s fault—but it was just like watching someone work on a whiteboard. Kind of a precursor to Khan Academy, kind of a drag. Went to high school—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:02):

Wait, wait, wait, wait. We were—I’m not ready to jump to high school. Wait. Can you pause for just a second?

Dan Meyer (09:06):

Yeah. Rock on.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:07):

I just need you to go back to the triangle thing. So in that moment, what did that mean for you that you had had all these experiences with math and then you encounter math in a completely different sphere, a public school, and it did not have a connection or meaning to you because prior to that, it sounds like it was pretty positive. Right? Explore these things you’re curious about; there’s not, like, a level you need to stick with…

Dan Meyer (09:33):

Yep, yep. Yeah. I think that’s right. Maybe it was a little bit of a classic, like, “Oh, I didn’t have a growth mindset; my mindset was like, ‘Oh, I’m good at math because I am, you know, born that way,’” and all of a sudden, that identity was, you know, thrown into question. And, you know, my foundation was all of a sudden quite shaky. And yeah, that’s—you know, I think I taught a lesson recently where I was like, “Hey, this whole thing with a less-than or equal-to sign and a greater-than or equal-to sign, like what those signs are: it’s just, it’s language. And if it’s confusing to you, it’s not because you’re bad at math; it’s ’cause language is oftentimes confusing ’cause people have to agree on it.” So I dunno, that sort of thing is kind of filtered in, filtered back in periodically, some sympathy for like how a lot of math is like just socially agreed upon ways of working with, you know, numbers, shapes, patterns, that kind of thing.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:20):

OK.

Dan Meyer (10:21):

Anyway.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:21):

  1. And in this home school—I have a lot of questions about that, but I’ll stick to one—were you in a community of people that you talked about these math ideas with? Were you homeschooled solo? You have a sibling, so I think you were together, right?

Dan Meyer (10:39):

Yeah. Yeah. I’ve got a twin sister. So we were, you know, like, right on with each other the whole way through there. And yeah, so we had—but it wasn’t, it wasn’t like a—it was a lot of individual work, with my flavor of homeschooling.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:54):

  1. Got it. And the tapes—wait, before you go to high school, the tapes, the VHS tapes, which I’m just loving this image—

Dan Meyer (11:02):

Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:02):

Was that a positive experience? Was that because that was an area of math that whoever was homeschooling you wasn’t that comfortable with? Why was it that route for the tapes, and what was that? Was that joyful for you?

Dan Meyer (11:15):

Yeah, definitely not joyful. Yeah, it was like, if you had questions, you couldn’t really ask them of the VHS tape. It didn’t work out so well in that way. And it was a lot of operational-type math. It was, you know—there was no give and take; it was all kind of take. From the video teacher. And yeah, I was doing that because my homeschool teacher, my mom, who is very smart in lots of areas, did not have the math knowledge or confidence, especially to help with math at eighth grade. And that was a big reason why, flash-forward to the next year, went to high school.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:48):

Nice segue. OK.

Dan Meyer (11:50):

<laugh> You caught up to high school…I encountered just like four years of just crazy-good, just bonkers-good math teachers who just really changed a lot for me. Especially, Mr. Bishop and Mr. Cavender, very cool folks who did a lot. And especially, I think Mr. Bishop and Cavender both modeled for me what curiosity from a knowledgeable adult looks like. Like someone who, you know, now I can say to myself, “Oh, they were kind of like putting on an act of being very curious about answers they were hearing for the 2000th time from a student,” let’s say, but what a powerful experience that was for me to feel like, “Oh, wow, my thoughts are interesting to someone besides myself.” I got like, maybe it’s two real highlights that I’ll just point to, from my math bio that made me the math teacher and person that I am. Let’s see here. Maybe three, if you you’ll indulge me. One is just like the idea that you could do math wherever you have your brain, a pencil and a paper. And so I remember like in high school, I was in church with my family and kind of a little bit bored of whatever’s going on. And I just had the Bolton and I like drew a pentagon, a regular one, then a hexagon, a regular one, and kept on drawing, like adding sides to the shape. And it was like, it was becoming a circle. And, you know, I was able to take the area of each of those shapes and say, you know, “What happens as you send the number of sides to infinity?” And watch as the formula for area of a circle, Pi R squared, popped out. And it was kind of a literal religious experience, in that moment, just like, “Wow, like my brain’s so cool and math is so cool and paper and pencil’s so cool.” And so there’s that. Just that kind of experience was pretty awesome. And then I would just say like, I’ve had some really fantastic experiences with math in the world itself. Stuff like—let’s see, this is gonna invite more questions from Bethany, probably, maybe I should avoid—I got, I have a Guinness—I have a Guinness world record that’s almost 20 years old. This Guinness world record is—it’s old enough to drive basically at this point. And almost old enough to drink. But like it was—it was a record for chaining the longest paper clip chain together in 24 hours. And the only way I was able to break that record was through mathematics. Where, like, I would be finishing a box of clips. And I would say to my buddy who was there, “I just finished a box of clips.” And that person would type in the number of clips that I had just done. And then a mathematical formula that I had created would tell me how many—how long the chain was at that point. It was being rolled around a spool. And like, it’s just like, wow. So math just made this possible. You know, math revealed that the record I was trying to beat was beatable, because I did the math on it. It was, like, thousands of feet long in 24 hours. And other folks might be like, “Oh, like, that’s that’s huge!” But me, I was like, “All right, let’s divide this out. You know, divide by 24 hours in a day, divide by 60 minutes an hour, 60 seconds in a minute. Oh, that’s like one clip every four seconds. That’s really slow.” You know, think about that <counts aloud>, “Clip, two, three, four. Clip two, three…” It was just slow. So math helped me, you know, wreck that record. Which to my knowledge still still stands. Don’t get any ideas, Math Teacher Lounge Folks! Is this news to you, Bethany? You haven’t blinked in the last, like, five minutes. I’m curious if this is new.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:20):

It is news to me. And I have so many questions. Because OK, if four seconds was slow, so then what was your like—so then I’m assuming a hundred clips per box? Like, what was the rate, you know, per box? How long did it take you to complete a box? What did this friend like? Did this friend stick with you for the whole 24 hours? Did you really do it for 24 hours? Or once you beat the record, did you rest? How did you account for biological function? Like, needs? Like a restroom?

Dan Meyer (15:51):

<Interrupting> Like what?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:51):

Eating.

Dan Meyer (15:51):

Like what, Bethany? OK.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:52):

Um, Sleep.

Dan Meyer (15:55):

So yeah, maybe we dive into some of the specifics in a different time.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:59):

Just tell me one of ’em. Tell me one.

Dan Meyer (15:59):

I’ll just say. So as to discourage other Math Teacher Lounge listeners from taking this on—back off of the record, folks!—this was back in college, so I was a little more limber back then. But I did one—I think it was 1.8 seconds per clip. For an entire 24 hours. Just like, so just like think about it, would you? If you’re gonna step to me on this one, just think about that, OK? And then, and then, you know, make an informed decision.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:28):

Wait. Wait, wait, I just wanna tell you one thing. I’m picturing somebody with a straw, and like, giving you water as you keep clipping. I’m picturing, like, music, I…

Dan Meyer (16:37):

That’s not far. That’s not far. That’s not far from—yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:40):

So many questions! OK. Go on. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Go on. This is your bio.

Dan Meyer (16:44):

We gotta, I gotta wrap this up. I wanna hear your bio. But, like, I would just say like this move to this sense that math is actually a thing that’s useful for more than just a grade; it’s useful for more than just, you know, the societal, you know, adulation that comes from being a math nerd. That kind of thing. And so that, I think that affected a lot of math teaching for me. And, if I gotta, like, summarize math teaching itself in a journey, it went from like, “Hey kids, aren’t I awesome?” to, “Hey kids, isn’t math awesome?” to “Hey kids, aren’t you awesome?” And like that journey was facilitated by lots and lots of people, you know, a lot of personal growth, but at this point, at one point I was like, “Hey, math can help you get records and whatnot. It’s really useful.” And now I’m like, “Wow, your brain’s just doing just really interesting things. I can help you understand how interesting those things are, and maybe make them more interesting, or interesting in a different way, with some help here.” Let’s put a pin in that. That’s the math bio.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (17:50):

  1. So I have no doubt that if you ask someone in your life, listeners, for their math bio, that you will discover things about them that you never knew. Literally the questions that I have…I have so many question. And Dan is very good at, you know, bringing me back. Bring me back, like, come on, come on. But I just wanna say, overall, your journey seems pretty joyful. It seems pretty joyful. It seems pretty full of confidence. I don’t wanna say “ego” in a negative way, but I wanna say you were buoyed by these experiences that allowed you to feel like math was a place for you to thrive.

Dan Meyer (18:36):

Right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (18:36):

Where you could try out things. You could try it out and just, “I could do that!” Right? Like…your relationship just felt very, like…you felt like you had autonomy, agency, perhaps much like you, you operate in this world. Dan, is that, is that right <laugh>?

Dan Meyer (18:54):

Yeah, I think it’s fair to say. And without telling too much of her story, my twin sister with whom I share most things, including genetics, you know—she had a very different experience in math early on. She’s brilliant. She’s a doctor. And not, you know, the book kind of doctor that I am, but like a real, you know, medical doctor. She’s brilliant. But we were—we encountered different messages about who math was made for, early on in, you know, in our entire math learning. And she—we both digested the messages that we were sent, and took, you know, different, different paths because of them, for sure.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:31):

Funny how that works. I thank you, Dan. I do. For in all sincerity, I appreciate you sharing that. And I think that it’s exciting to hear how it influenced your teaching. It feels like you want to cultivate those experiences for your students. And I’ve been in the room when you’ve presented; I was in a room where you taught a class live. It felt like you were making space for the students to have these aha moments. And it feels like in your work at Desmos, and now Amplify, you’re trying to create these products that allow folks to recreate these amazing math moments. Right? And that it’s for everyone and that it’s accessible and it can be very positive. I feel like I have this new perspective on kind of the energy you bring to your teaching. So thank you for sharing that.

Dan Meyer (20:24):

Yeah. Been a pleasure. Thanks for your questions here, Bethany. And it’s been—it’s been fun to reflect on it. And I do—I do feel very lucky in lots of ways. Privileged. Lucky. I know, like—I think the world has been set up for my success in lots of ways, as who I am. But I do just…yeah, I feel—I want more people to experience what it’s like when you walk into a math classroom and it’s like, “Hey, this place is for you. You have interesting thoughts about this. Let’s get ’em out.” So that’s awesome. I would love to hear about you and how you…I mean, we have taught different kinds of kids. You know, I taught kids who I think were somewhat set in, they’re a little bit more solid at secondary in who they are as a math learner. Like “I know who math is and who I am with math.” And I’m really excited to hear what your math bio allowed you to do with students who were perhaps open to the idea that they are very mathematical or at least not yet closed off to those possibilities. So, yeah. What are some of the high, the, you know, the high and low water marks of the making of Bethany Lockhart Johnson, math teacher? <Laugh>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:24):

Thanks for asking, Dan. <Laugh> I’ve shared aspects of my math bio because I think it really informs the way that I talk to people about math and think about math. And I like to share it because I want folks to consider their own journey with math, as we like engage with problem-solving and sense-making and thinking about the students in our classroom. My dad is a math and computer science major. So he had a computer very early on. I wish he had invested in Apple early on when he had like one of the first Apple computers ever. And, sorry, dad, but it’s true. I do wish you had done that.

Dan Meyer (22:10):

I’m sure he does too.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (22:11):

Oh, he does. So math and computers and conversations about counting, you know, it felt like it was kind of just normal. Like it was around me. And I went to Montessori, which is a private school that—oh, they have some public Montessori—but it’s very self-directed. And so we would have these kind of charts, these goals for the day that you explored. And so we would explore math in very, I don’t know, very organic ways, with these natural materials. And I feel like I excelled at math, but it wasn’t something that I was conscious of. It was just like, “Oh, well, yeah. Math, it’s, you know, something we do.” And then when I went to—when I left Montessori in fourth grade, I remember that year being a lot of like repetition. I was like, well, we did this. We covered this. And except for the mission project that we hadn’t done, that was all new. And that’s it. For another time I’ll share about that. But <laugh> then, they actually, I was moved with a group of students to the fifth grade math class, ’cause we had already done the work that we were doing. And so, it wasn’t that it felt like it came easily, but it did make sense. What we were doing made sense. And then it all kind of changed. There was a lot of change in my family. There was, like, missed school time. And we moved and I went to a new middle school and I was in this environment with students who—it was like an accelerated program. And so I was in this environment with students who were pretty competitive with each other. And I remember going—and I was not from of a competitive environment; like Montessori is not competitive. It’s not about that.

Dan Meyer (24:02):

Right. Right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:02):

It’s—it was very strange to me that I would be competing against anyone, even competing against myself. And I, you know, knew how to set goals. But it was a different level of energy. And I felt like, because I wasn’t competitive in that nature, I felt like that kind—I felt on the outside of a lot of the energy. Besides the regular, like, middle-school feeling outside of things. And I remember the first friend that I made. Hi, Susan! She had said to me, this was like maybe our second week of school, she’s like, “Oh, at lunchtime, come with me to math club.” And I was like, “OK.” And I remember walking into that room and I had no idea what was going on. And so that was one of the first times where I was just like, “Whoa, I have absolutely no concept of what they’re talking about or what.” These are my peers. I felt very—it was very—it was strange. It was strange. I was like, “This doesn’t feel like a space for me at all.” When I think ordinarily I was kind of excited about the idea of going to math club at lunch, you know? And over middle school, I kind of just got progressively more and more behind. It started with missing some work and then missing more and then checking out. And, you know, the problem was that I really made it about myself. That, like, it wasn’t something that I was then good at or could do. When really it was that well, pre-algebra, I was having a really hard time in like the rest of my life. And so I wasn’t real present in that class. And so when I got to algebra, it didn’t make a whole lot of sense. And then if I missed Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, well, Thursday is gonna be hard, you know? And, it just got progressively harder and harder. So I had this great idea that between eighth grade and ninth grade, I was going to take this accelerated geometry class. ‘Cause that was the ninth grade class, it was geometry. And I would take it. It was like geometry in three weeks or something. So then when I entered high school, I would’ve gotten this like jumpstart. But I wish I had said, “Oh, I’ll take this, and then in ninth grade I’ll take geometry.” So like I’ve already kind of gotten a preview of the material. But instead I went to the 10th grade math, which was like intermediate algebra, trigonometry. I had absolutely no clue what was going on. And I had a very, very difficult time and I wasn’t ready for that class. But it was exacerbated by the fact that this teacher felt very free to let the freshmen in that class know that they shouldn’t be in that class. That this class was for 10th graders.

Dan Meyer (26:49):

Oh wow. Oh, wow.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:51):

And we had a rather contentious relationship. And I will never forget that we were in the hallway, and he says to me, “You don’t belong here.” And I’ve talked to—I’ve talked to a girlfriend of mine about her experiences with this teacher and she has the fondest memories.

Dan Meyer (27:13):

Wow.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:14):

She—in fact, almost everyone I’ve spoken with, you know, if we are talking about past teachers or, “Oh, what was that class like?” I mean, they just have these wonderful memories! And for me, my sense of like belonging was already so on a tight rope anyway, that to have this adult, this teacher, tell me, “You do not belong here,” just crushed me. And in hindsight, I think he was saying like, “This class is too hard for you.” I mean, maybe. <Laugh> But all I heard was “You don’t belong here.” And I extrapolated it to connect to math and to anything having to do with math in general. And it just got worse and worse through high school in the world of math. My next math class was even—I had to repeat that class, and still didn’t understand what was going on, and felt more out of place, and, you know, it’s one of those things that I just kind of had started to accept that, I guess, math isn’t for me. I guess I’m just not a math person. Or whatever these stories are that I started to create and build and find evidence for around me that was informing that this wasn’t for me. And I had always done well in school. I was in, you know, accelerated classes. I felt like I was capable of problem solving. And yet in math, I just felt like I had all of this evidence saying that I didn’t belong there. And so when I went to college, I took whatever two math classes were—you know, I was in performing arts and then I did ethnic studies as well. And I remember you had to take two math classes that were GEs. There were these classes that if you don’t wanna deal with math, you go take those classes. And I was like, “Oh yeah, I’ll take that. I’ll take that.” The gulf widened, you know? <Laugh> And I didn’t feel like anxiety when I had to do things like balance my checkbook or navigate math in everyday spaces. It was just, it would never occur to me that I would like seek out opportunities to engage with math or think about it or talk about it.

Dan Meyer (29:35):

That is—yeah, that’s just so wild, how, I don’t know, like it’s often, from the student’s perspective, it is them in a vacuum with math, and the two of them interact and decide if, you know, if they’re right for each other. But from the grown-up perspective, it’s just, you know, it’s a little bit clearer that your story with math was not just you in math, but you with, you know, various external things happening. With family, various teachers playing their different roles—sometimes, you know, really tragic and horrible roles—and then like the compounding mathematical debt that it feels like you were kind of building up, as challenges in one year didn’t get resolved and moved into the next year and so on. And all that makes me wonder—it makes me, like really, really scared, first of all, because I would bet that your teacher might not even remember that moment, that for you is part of just a pivotal moment in your math story, and how many kids have I played—have I been a part of their story in that way and wouldn’t even recall? You know what I’m saying? So that’s a scary part. And then also I’m just wondering, like, how can we, how can we help kids who are in those moments recognize that, “Oh, this kid is like absent a bunch,” and give them more resources to be successful rather than say, “Well, you just gotta try harder now.” Those are things I’m wondering, hearing your story. Thank you for sharing that. I’d love to know more about how you then became a teacher and what all that did for you as you helped students.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:06):

Well, but to answer what you were saying, it wasn’t that I wasn’t—I was always absent physically, but at least like mentally at that point, because it had become so difficult. It didn’t make sense to me. So I was just really checked out in math class, you know? So in hindsight, you know, as a teacher, for sure I can look back, and especially hearing these stories and these experiences my friend had with this teacher and just like chalks up as one of like her most favorite teachers ever! And you know, he clearly did a great job for so many students. But for me, and I think for some people, they would’ve taken those challenges and, you know, it would have fortified them in a different way or something. But for me, I took it upon myself to mean certain things about myself and about my ability and what I was capable of. And so I think, I think in some ways, you know, yeah, it’s all, it’s all interconnected. You know, when your students walk in the door, they’re not this—the things that are impacting them in their life are coming into the room with them. And I don’t think we can take that for granted and think, “Well, if they just focus hard enough…”

Dan Meyer (32:21):

Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (32:23):

So let’s go back to my love of Oprah. You know, Oprah talks about living your best life. And something I really appreciate about Oprah is that she encourages you to examine, like, sticking points, right? Like she doesn’t just say, “Well, this…just pretend nothing ever happened, and everything’s fine!” You know, she really talks about making time for reflection. And I kind of got mad that anytime I thought about math, or math schooling came up. Or, you know, whatever, any time that came up that I just felt UGH about it. And I felt like a failure. And I’m like, “You know what, what if I took a math class? And I’m an adult at this point. I’ve graduated. I have—I’ve left college. I have my degrees. But I said, “What if I took a math class?” So I went down to, the city college and I found out that you have to take this exam, like a placement exam. And I went and took the placement exam. And I remember it’s one of the responsive tests where if you get it right, the next question’s a little harder. And so I’m taking it, panicking, because it’s getting more like…I just, you know. And I remember it placed me in like, whatever, Algebra Something, this class that was far more advanced than I thought I should be in. And I was like, there’s been a mistake! You know, and I went to the counselor and said, you know, “I got these results, but I couldn’t answer a lot of the questions on the test.” She’s like, “No, no, no, that’s how it works.” So I go take this class and the class was hard. And I decided that I was just gonna keep showing up. And every day before class, I kid you not, they had a little math…it was like a math center where you could go in and they had a bunch of tables and you’d sit at the table and you could sit and do your work or whatever. If you had a question, you walked up and put your name on a clipboard and then somebody would come and help you. So I did that, every single—like before every single class I would go in. I’d sit there. I’d do the work. I’d go. And I’d get help. Like somebody would walk over and you know, some kid for whom they’re like this…you know, they’re math—it might be you, Dan! It could be you! It could have been you! You know, would walk over and be like—

Dan Meyer (34:38):

Yeah, I was in Help like that. Naw, it’s awesome. Love, love those people. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:42):

And you know, I did it. And I did so well in the class. I did exceedingly well in the class. And I said—

Dan Meyer (34:50):

Take that! Take that, everything! Every other math experience!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:53):

I said, what?

Dan Meyer (34:55):

Yeah!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:55):

Wait a second.

Dan Meyer (34:56):

Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (34:57):

And it was that I was present. I was not afraid to look at what didn’t make sense. And if something didn’t make sense, it didn’t mean there was something wrong with me. Whaaaaat?

Dan Meyer (35:10):

Yeah. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (35:10):

So I was just in such a different space. And then I took another math class and that class was even harder. And I did the same thing where I went to the little lab and, you know, and it just buoyed me. And it made me realize that, like, this story, that my experience with it was very powerful and that was a real lived experience, but that it didn’t have to define my relationship with math. But then! I decided I wanted to go back to school to become a classroom teacher. And I totally—this was a couple years after that math class experience. So now, you know, I’m healing my relationship with math through basic positive experiences, da, da, da, you know, doing other work. But fast-forward, for a whole number of reasons, decided to become a classroom teacher. And I freaked out. All of my—like, I’m studying for the GRE and the CSET and all the things you have to the hoops you have to jump through to apply to the masters program and the credential program. And I freaked out. I was so close to quitting, Dan. Because I was convinced that the reason I couldn’t be a classroom teacher is because I wasn’t capable in math. Like I was—it was all that resurfaced. And even though I now had evidence to say something different, to the contrary, it was still so visceral. And I was so scared. But I passed that Math CSET.

Dan Meyer (36:47):

Get it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:47):

I did well enough on the GRE—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:50):

Yes!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:50):

You know, I finished my credential. I worked really, really hard. I had to work so hard in my student placement, when I was student teaching for a fifth-grade class, ’cause I felt like, “Oh my God!” I mean, now I could do the mathematics, but I couldn’t TEACH it to someone, you know? But I had amazing professors at UCI, and my math professors really like just—and my mentor teacher! shout out to Jennifer! shout out to Phil!—these amazing mentor teachers who just loved teaching and who loved—like you said, you have these teachers in your life who you got to see the way that they listened to students. They taught me about that love of listening to students. And then I fell in love with, you know, CGI, cognitively guided instruction, and started learning all about all of these educators who just wanna learn from students’ thinking. And it was just so powerful. And I realize as a kindergarten teacher that I have this really special role in helping to create space for a positive school experience. Like we get to talk about—I talk about my students as mathematicians; they’re writers; they’re thinkers; they’re problem-solvers. And I also want to make space for parents. Some of them, this is their first kid in kindergarten, and they brought all of their experiences, a lot of it negative, that they had had with mathematics. So I felt like it was such an exciting opportunity to help show parents how they could have conversations about math with their students. That also, I hope helped heal their own anxiety with mathematics.

Dan Meyer (38:41):

Right, right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (38:42):

Like, I’ve not even scratched the surface of math learning. But I just have such a changed perspective and relationship with math. And I just fell in love with the sense-making. And I fell in love with the journey of it. I still experience math anxiety about a wide variety of things, but I do love it. And I feel like there’s a space for me in relationship with math. And that really excites me.

Dan Meyer (39:09):

Yeah. Wow. Listen to that folks. We, we don’t deserve her! Bethany Lockhart Johnson! She got some math game and could have gone off there and, you know, become an accountant or something. And she chose to hang with kids and their parents. That’s so wild that you’re like rehabbing parents and their self-conception about mathematics at the same time. I think that is so cool.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:32):

Well, thanks Dan Meyer. I gotta tell you, I don’t know when or if I’ve ever shared that much of my math story. So there is a certain amount of vulnerability there. But thanks for listening. And I’m glad that, you know—I think there’s space for us to talk about these things that we care deeply about, but that can be really complicated.

Dan Meyer (39:56):

Yes. Yes. And I love how you you’ve really sharpened the point on what I feel like I know in my brain, but not my body all the time: That individual teachers are huge. Like, individual teachers, and individual moments of teaching, are just not something to play with. You know, like that kid that’s in fifth grade having a tough time, like there could be a month or a day-long period where all of a sudden, like, you’re just like, “Oh yeah, I’m back in the mix; like, me and math are still buddies.” And there’s also like moments that you had, where like one casual word from a teacher can just really put a huge wedge between you and a discipline that needs and wants you and your intellect in it.That’s a really powerful testimonial. Not just for math, but for teaching, your teaching bio.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:43):

I agree with you. And I also, I also…you know, I think we can’t put this—we are human. Teachers are human. And so I’m sure there’s things I’ve said to students. Twenty-second story: a student stapled his finger in my class. <Laugh> And I remember holding his hand and saying, “Why did you do that?” And I wasn’t yelling at him, but it was like, I am sure the panic in my face…like, that’s what he’s gonna remember about kindergarten. Right? <Laugh>.

Dan Meyer (41:19):

Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:20):

That. He will remember that. He won’t remember the really cool city project we did. He’s gonna remember his teacher holding his hand, in his face: “Why did you do that?”

Dan Meyer (41:30):

Yeah. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:30):

You know, so we’re human. And yes, it was awful that that teacher said that to me. There were a thousand other ways that he could have said whatever it was he was thinking. And that did deeply wound me. But despite his influence—because teachers do have a lot of power and I think they need to examine that power, ongoing—it still doesn’t have to define us. So I don’t wanna put this pressure, like—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:55):

Sure.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:56):

“So never ever say anything negative!” You know, we’re human.

Dan Meyer (42:00):

I feel like that kid is currently on some office-supply podcast talking about “your office-supply bio” and saying, “Let me tell you how I first got really freaked out by staples. Here’s the deal: I only use paper clips. And here’s why.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:15):

“Here’s why.” But then—callback!—he’s going to stumble upon THIS podcast and think, “And because I’m so adept with paper clips, I can beat that record!”

Dan Meyer (42:30):

Though—aaay! whoa! Settle down!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:31):

BOOM.

Dan Meyer (42:31):

Don’t get any ideas, kid. No way. Uh-uh. I don’t like that at all. That’s not what—that’s not what I want to have happen here. No, thank you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:41):

Well, I’m spent, Dan. I need a nap.

Dan Meyer (42:45):

Yeah. I need a box of Kleenex. I need a nap. I need a—yeah, for sure, a baba. Uh-huh. Definitely. Hey, so look, I’m not expecting you folks out there in the lounge to kind of give us the same depth or breadth. You know, we are here, of course, for your entertainment. Feast on our stories and dramas. But I would love to know at some point, like, what are a few, a few moments that really came to define you mathematically? Came to influence you as a teacher? I think we would do really well for each other to understand that about all of our processes. So yeah, I would just toss in a plug in for Twitter, @MTLShow, or Facebook, Math Teacher Lounge; it would be fantastic to hear from you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (43:24):

Thanks so much for listening.

Dan Meyer (43:25):

Thanks, folks. Bye now.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dan Meyer says about math teaching

“Teaching, more than other professions, is a generational profession. The kinds of joyful experiences we offer, or don’t offer, now affect the experiences students that haven’t even been born yet will have years later.”

– Dan Meyer

Meet the guests

Dan Meyer

Dan Meyer taught high school math to students who didn’t like high school math. He has advocated for better math instruction on CNN, Good Morning America, Everyday With Rachel Ray, and TED.com. He earned his doctorate from Stanford University in math education and is currently the Dean of Research at Desmos, where he explores the future of math, technology, and learning. Dan has worked with teachers internationally and in all 50 United States and was named one of Tech & Learning’s 30 Leaders of the Future.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson

Bethany Lockhart Johnson is an elementary school educator and author. Prior to serving as a multiple-subject teacher, she taught theater and dance and now loves incorporating movement and creative play into her classroom. Bethany is committed to helping students find joy in discovering their identities as mathematicians. In addition to her role as a full-time classroom teacher, Bethany is a Student Achievement Partners California Core Advocate and is active in national and local mathematics organizations. Bethany is a member of the Illustrative Mathematics Elementary Curriculum Steering Committee and serves as a consultant, creating materials to support families during distance learning.

A woman with curly hair and glasses smiles outdoors; a man with short dark hair smiles indoors in front of a blurred math teacher lounge, highlighting valuable math teacher resources.
A graphic with the text "Math Teacher Lounge with Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer" on colored overlapping circles.

About Math Teacher Lounge: The podcast

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Science of Reading:
A glossary

The Science of Reading reflects decades of research on how children best learn to read and which instructional practices best support their journey. Understanding common Science of Reading definitions can help fast-track your instruction, so we’ve put together this glossary as a starting point.

Two girls in green uniforms look at a notebook together in a classroom. Educational icons and a "Built on the Science of Reading" label are overlaid on the image.

Common Science of Reading terms

Some of the most important terms for building your understanding of the Science of Reading:

Alphabetic principle: The understanding that specific sounds can be mapped onto specific letters
Biliteracy: The ability to communicate effectively in two different languages
Composition: The creation or organization of a written piece, short or long
Comprehension: The ability to understand what is written or said
Decoding: Translating a word from print to speech by understanding sound-spelling correspondences
Domain-specific knowledge: Understanding of the key principles in a specific subject area (such as scientific principles, poetry conventions)
Domain-specific vocabulary: Words key to understanding a specific subject area (such as scientific terms, poetic terms, technical terms)

Dyslexia: A language-based learning disorder or set of learning differences that makes it difficult to learn to read, write, or spell

Encoding: Translating a word from speech to print by understanding sound-spelling correspondences

Fluency: The ability to read a text with accuracy, speed, and expression

Inferences: Conclusions drawn through reasoning, without their being stated directly in a text

Learning differences: The unique ways in which brains can process information and the different rates at which they do it

Mental model: A general idea or structure of information that can be applied to many texts

Metacognition: Being mindful of one’s own thinking processes, including using knowledge of a given task, knowledge of cognitive strategies, and knowledge of one’s self, to successfully learn

Morphology: The study of word parts and how words are formed

MTSS (Multi-Tiered Systems of Support): A comprehensive framework designed to provide systematic and differentiated support to all students

Phoneme: The smallest unit of sound that distinguishes one word from another

Phonemic awareness: The ability to identify and work with individual sounds (phonemes) within a word

Phonics: Teaching the relationship between the sounds in oral language and the letters in written language

Reading Rope: A visual representation of the way decoding and comprehension skills work together in the brain of a skilled reader

Reasoning: The ability to apply knowledge based on new or existing information to comprehend the meaning of a passage

Science of Reading: The body of ongoing scientific research about how the brain works when one is learning to read, and how reading is best taught

Science of Writing: The body of ongoing scientific research about how the brain works when one is learning to write, and how writing is best taught

Sight recognition: The ability to recognize a written word without having to sound it out (also called word recognition)

Simple View of Reading: A framework that explains how word recognition and language comprehension work together to produce skilled reading

Simple View of Writing: A framework that explains how transcription and composition skills work together to produce skilled writing

Tier 1 instruction: Core grade-level instruction

Tier 2 instruction: Additional support for small groups of students to reinforce grade-level instruction

Tier 3 instruction: Intensive, more individualized intervention

Transcription: The process of converting speech into written text

Vocabulary: The quantity and quality of words a student knows

Word recognition: The ability to recognize a written word without having to sound it out (also called sight recognition)

Your guide to getting started with the Science of Reading

Looking for more grounding in the Science of Reading? Download our free ebook.

Cover of a guide titled "Science of Reading: A New Teacher’s Guide," featuring a teacher reading to two children, pencil and book icons, and helpful K-5 teaching resources. Perfect for those asking, "What is the science of reading?.

¡El futuro es bilingüe! | The future is bilingual!

Promote biliteracy with Amplify Caminos, a K–5 Spanish language arts curriculum that helps teachers inspire students as they become confident readers, writers, and thinkers in Spanish. The program combines rich content knowledge with systematic foundational skills instruction that is grounded in the Science of Reading and supports multiple teaching models. Para la versión en español, haga clic aquí.

A girl runs joyfully surrounded by a turtle, a soccer ball, an open book, and tropical scenery with a toucan and ancient ruins, with "¡Hola!" written above.

Cultivating biliteracy pathways

Amplify Caminos is designed to support any biliteracy model, including English as a Second Language (ESL), transitional bilingual programs, dual language strands, and Spanish immersion programs. Combined with its English language partner, Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA), Amplify Caminos provides a comprehensive biliteracy solution.

Our approach

Grounded in the Science of Reading and following biliteracy principles, Amplify Caminos combines rich, varied content knowledge with systematic foundational skills instruction to deliver a research-based biliteracy curriculum

Leveraging the Science of Reading

At the heart of the Science of Reading is the Simple View of Reading, a formula describing how skilled reading requires both language comprehension and word recognition. Amplify Caminos is built on this model, with powerful resources that drive real results.

A diagram showing "Language comprehension" and "Word recognition" factors combining to result in "Skilled reading," with associated Amplify Caminos educational materials illustrated below each term.
A four-step diagram shows language learning: starting with sounds, building to phonemes and syllables, cracking the code, and growing in complexity, using "piñata" as an example.

Developing foundational skills explicitly and systematically

Amplify Caminos instruction is based on how the Spanish language works. Students learn vowel sounds and common sounds before blending them to form syllables and words. Less frequent consonants and other complex elements are presented later, with an intentional progression that sets students up for success.

Building background knowledge drives results

Students dig deeper and make connections across content areas to build a robust knowledge base for comprehending complex texts. Amplify Caminos and Amplify CKLA follow the Core Knowledge Sequence—a content-specific, cumulative, and coherent approach to building knowledge—with parallel topics to support research-based and supportive Tier 1 instruction in Spanish and English.

Explore how Core Knowledge curriculum improves reading scores and eliminates achievement gaps.

Three circles show stages of science education: plants in kindergarten, ecology with birds in grade 3, and layered rock formations for geology in grade 4.
Five illustrated children's books with colorful covers, featuring titles in Spanish and cartoon characters including a llama, children, dancers, and a large cactus.

Culturally relevant and challenging texts

Students learn about diverse topics and genres while better understanding themselves and the world with a variety of texts. Authentic Spanish literature, including original decodables by Latino and Hispanic authors, and transadapted texts connect knowledge topics and foundational skills instruction to provide a rich learning experience.

Being bilingual is a superpower

Bilingualism is a cognitive strength: Research attributes it to increased attention, improved working memory, greater awareness of language, and more. Honor the unique skills, strengths, and needs of your multilingual learners with Amplify Caminos and Amplify CKLA.

What’s included

Amplify Caminos features engaging print and multimedia materials—accessible from anywhere—designed to provide a robust literacy-rich foundation in every classroom.

A laptop screen displays a kindergarten daily instruction webpage in Spanish, showing lesson categories with colorful illustrated thumbnails.

High-quality teacher materials

Amplify Caminos teachers effectively deliver instruction with print and digital resources, including:

  • Teacher resources and on-demand professional development.
  • Teacher Guides with embedded differentiation.
  • Formal and informal assessments.
  • Ready-made and customizable lesson slides.
  • Bilingual Connections to support cross-linguistic transfer.

Immersive student resources

Amplify Caminos students stay engaged with a variety of print and digital resources, including:

  • Original decodables and read-aloud Big Books (K–2), Student Readers (3–5), and authentic Spanish literature anthologies (4–5).
  • Poet’s Journal and Writer’s Journal (write-in Student Readers for Grades 4–5).
  • Student Activity Books with embedded assessments.
  • Research units for independent research built around a trade book.
  • Multisensory phonics materials:
    • Letter Cards (K–2)
    • Syllable Cards (K–2)
    • Image Cards (K–3)
    • Plus, digital anchor charts and a Sound Library.
A collage of illustrated Spanish-language educational book covers and pages, featuring a knight, a rabbit, and children playing, alongside Spanish text excerpts.
An open ebook on a tablet displays Spanish text about animals, accompanied by photos of a caterpillar, birds, a jaguar, raccoons, a polar bear, and a fox.

Robust digital experience

Like Amplify CKLA, Amplify Caminos is proud to be a premier high-quality instructional material (HQIM) offering in elementary language arts, with rich and research-based content—including an expanding library of engaging digital materials—that helps you authentically support, challenge, and engage your students. From digital Teacher Guides to lesson projectables, we provide all the tools needed to successfully deliver every lesson.

Explore more programs based on the Science of Reading

All of the programs in our literacy suite are designed to support and complement each other. Learn more about our related programs:

Welcome Reviewers, to Amplify Desmos Math!

Amplify Desmos Math thoughtfully combines conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and application. Each lesson is designed to tell a story by posing problems that invite a variety of approaches before guiding students to synthesize their understanding of the learning goals.

Scroll to learn more about the program and explore sample materials.

About the program

We believe in math that motivates. Our structured approach to problem-based learning builds on students’ curiosity to develop lasting grade-level understandings for all students. 

The program thoughtfully combines conceptual understanding, fluency, and application, motivating students with interesting problems they are eager to solve. Teachers can spend more time where it’s most impactful: creating a collaborative classroom of learners.

A powerful suite of math resources

Amplify Desmos Math combines the best of problem-based lessons, intervention, personalized practice, and assessments into a coherent and engaging experience for both students and teachers.

A digital interface displays a math screener report on the left and a math problem involving division, alongside a visual representation of students lined up on the right, integrating rich math resources from Amplify Desmos Math.

Screening and progress monitoring

mCLASS® Assessments, along with daily formative checks, measure not only what students know, but also how they think. The asset-based assessment system provides teachers with targeted, actionable insights, linked to core instruction and intervention resources.

Two side-by-side math activities for children: on the left, a caterpillar-themed block challenge, and on the right, a worksheet for finding pairs that sum to 10. These exercises are fantastic ways to amplify children's engagement with math concepts.

Core instruction

Amplify Desmos Math lessons provide a structured approach to problem-based learning, helping teachers create a collaborative math community with students at its center. Each lesson systematically builds on students’ curiosity to develop lasting grade-level understandings for all students.

Two pages from a New York math textbook on determining coordinates after a rotation. Includes sections on modeled review, guided practice, and teacher's notes, with diagrams and examples that amplify the learning experience.

Differentiation and intervention

Integrated resources like Mini-Lessons, Fluency Practice, and Math Adventures provide targeted intervention on a specific concept or skill connected to daily instruction. Extensions are also available to stretch students’ understanding.
Boost™ Personalized Learning activities help students access grade-level math through engaging, independent digital practice. Responsive Feedback™ adjusts to students’ work, providing item-level adaptivity to further support their learning.

Two pages from a New York math textbook on determining coordinates after a rotation. Includes sections on modeled review, guided practice, and teacher's notes, with diagrams and examples that amplify the learning experience.

An approach that supports teachers

Clear, step-by-step instructional moves help teachers plan and teach student-centered lessons that use student thinking to differentiate instruction and guide to grade-level understanding. They include:

  • Guidance on what to listen for and how to respond.
  • Clear learning objectives to keep learning on track for each activity and lesson.
  • Daily reinforcement activities to provide direct instruction when needed.

A structured approach to problem-based learning

Problem-based learning asks students to make sense of and think strategically about mathematically interesting problems. This approach allows students’ ideas to take
center stage, so they are active and engaged in their learning process. Teachers are able to hear and respond to student thinking in real time, guiding and differentiating instruction right in the moment.

Moving from “I do, We do, You do” to “You do, We do, I do”
Lessons begin by activating student’s prior knowledge and curiosity, inviting them to explore the math, collaborate, and refine their thinking. By focusing on developing student thinking first, teachers can better connect ideas, guide learning, and synthesize learning objectives.

Lessons that are rigorous and delightful

Every lesson in Amplify Desmos Math is designed to put students at the center of their learning. Utilizing research-based best practices, students engage in meaningful work based on rich problems and real-world experiences.

Two young girls build with colorful blocks at a table while an adult woman observes and assists them in a classroom setting.

Warm-Up

Lessons begin by inviting every student to contribute to the mathematical discussion. Instructional routines are often used to build fluency, set the context, activate prior knowledge, or highlight a strategy that may be helpful in the lesson. 

Rich learning activities

Math knowledge is built through experiences and meaningful interactions. Students notice, wonder, explore, calculate, predict, measure, explain their thinking, use math to settle disputes, create challenges for their classmates, and more. Teachers serve as a guide, using a Launch, Monitor, Connect framework:

  • Launch: Teachers offer a short introduction to the problem or challenge
  • Monitor: As students work individually, in pairs, or in groups, teachers ask questions and provide support to move student thinking closer to the intended math goal.
  • Connect: Teachers connect student ideas to the Key Takeaway of the activity to help students synthesize and solidify the big ideas.

Synthesis

Teachers ensure that students end the lesson with accurate and enduring understandings of the math goal through synthesis of student ideas, explicit instruction, and reflection.

A short Show What You Know assessment allows students to show what they know about the learning goals of the lesson and reveal what they are still learning.

Differentiation and practice

Lasting understanding requires reinforcement. Every lesson offers Lesson Practice instructional recommendations to Support, Strengthen, and Stretch learning.

Two side-by-side math activities for children: on the left, a caterpillar-themed block challenge, and on the right, a worksheet for finding pairs that sum to 10. These exercises are fantastic ways to amplify children's engagement with math concepts.

Print for every lesson with engaging digital experiences

Whether in print or digital form, engaging interactions enable students and teachers to openly exchange ideas. Each lesson includes student print materials, interactive teacher Presentation Screens, and digital resources for practice and differentiation. Some lessons also use manipulatives or provide options for students to use devices individually or in pairs. Device recommendations for student use are age-appropriate, with more frequent usage in middle and high school.

Demo access

Please login to the digital platform to experience our full program as part of your review. In order to access the digital platform, you’ll need to log into using your unique login credentials below.

  • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
  • Click “Log in with Amplify.”
  • Enter the username and password:
    • Username:
    • Password:
  • View the video for helpful platform navigation tips.

Assessments

By starting with what students already know, Amplify Desmos Math helps build a strong foundation for success to guide and support future learning. Teachers are empowered to transform every classroom into an engaged math community that invites, values, and develops student thinking. With explicit guidance on what to look for and how to respond, teachers can effectively support students as they develop their understanding.

Open math workbook showing an End-of-Unit Assessment with multiple-choice and written response questions on fractions and equivalent values.

Program assessments

A variety of performance data in Amplify Desmos Math provides evidence of student learning while helping students bolster their skills and understanding.

Unit-Level Assessments

Our embedded unit assessments offer key insights into students’ conceptual understanding of math. These assessments provide regular, actionable information about how students are thinking about and processing math, with both auto-scoring and in-depth rubrics that help teachers anticipate and respond to students’ learning needs.

Lesson-Level Assessments

Amplify Desmos Math lessons are centered around sense-making and in-the-moment feedback. Daily moments of assessment provide valuable evidence of learning for both the teacher and student.

Data and reporting

Amplify Desmos Math provides teachers and administrators with unified reporting and insights so that educators have visibility into what students know about grade-level math—and can plan instruction accordingly for the whole class, small groups, and individual students.

A table displays students' performance levels across various items, with a detailed score distribution for a specific assessment shown in a separate overlay. Geometric design elements accented the background, providing an engaging visual touch ideal for any math classroom using Amplify Desmos Math.

Assessment reports

Reporting functionality integrates unit assessments, lesson assessments, personalized learning, Benchmark assessments, and Progress Monitoring for a comprehensive look at student learning.

Our reports show proficiency and growth by domain, cluster, standard, and priority concept using performance data from unit assessments. Then our reports highlight areas of potential student need to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support.

At-a-glance views of unit-level assessment results inform your instructional planning, and you can also drill down to item-level analysis.

Standards reports

Our standards report allows you to monitor proficiency at the class and individual student levels. Proficiency and growth are shown by domain, cluster, standard, and priority concepts. Areas of potential student need are highlighted to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support.

Administrator reports

Amplify Desmos Math provides a complete picture of student, class, and district performance, allowing administrators to implement instructional and intervention plans.

  • Track student, class, and district performance with usage, completion, and assessment data.
  • Accurately group students and classes with the Benchmark and Progress Monitoring data of mCLASS Assessments and allow teachers to reliably implement and track the progress of Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention.
  • Provide one data-driven solution that educators can rely on for high-quality math instruction.

Differentiation and intervention

Amplify Desmos Math views differentiation as an ongoing process where teachers are both reactive and proactive to student needs, ensuring that all students have clear pathways to proficiency. Through rich data and teacher support, Amplify Desmos Math uses flexible categories of intervention and enrichment that adjust daily according to student thinking.

In-the-moment differentiation supports are available for every lesson, both digitally and in the print Teacher Edition.

A teacher sits at a table with two students, using small objects and a workbook to provide individualized instruction during a Boost Math lesson in a classroom with large windows.
A table showing differentiation teacher moves with examples of representing groups in different ways, support prompts, and a stretch question about patterns with more teams.

In-lesson differentiation

Within every lesson activity, teachers can use the suggestions in the Differentiation Teacher Moves table to provide in-the-moment instructional support while students are engaged in the work of the lesson. This table can help teachers anticipate the ways students may approach the activity, and provides prompts that they can use during the lesson to Support, Strengthen, and Stretch individual students in their thinking. Teachers are provided with clear student actions and understanding to look for, each matched with immediately usable suggestions for how to respond to the student thinking illustrated in each row of the table. In addition to using these suggestions in the moment as teachers monitor student work, teachers can review the Differentiation table in advance to help them anticipate how students are likely to approach the activity.

Differentiation: Beyond the Lesson

Teachers are provided with recommendations for resources to use with each group of students needing support, strengthening, and stretching after each lesson. Support, Strengthen, and Stretch resources include:

  • Mini-Lessons: 15-minute, small-group direct instruction lessons targeted to a specific concept or skill
  • Item Banks: Space for teachers to create practice and assessments by using filters and searching for standards, summative-style items, and more
  • Fluency Practice: Adaptive, personalized practice built out for basic operations and more
  • Centers (K–5): Lesson-embedded routines and practice for students that are vertically aligned across grade levels
  • Extensions: Lesson-embedded Teacher Moves including possible stretch questions and activities for students
  • Lesson Practice: Additional practice problems support every lesson
  • Math Adventures: Strategy-based math games where students engage with math concepts and practice skills in a fun digital environment
Two pages from a math workbook on determining coordinates after a rotation, with diagrams, problem sets, and instructional text, displayed on a yellow and gray background.
A classroom teaching guide displays strategies for discussing pre-image and image in math, goals for a parallelogram lesson, and tips for supporting multilingual learners.

Multilingual/English Learner supports

Supports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentiSupports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentional points within each lesson. These suggested supports are specific, targeted actions that are beneficial for ML/ELs. They often describe a modification to increase access to the task or provide support with contextual or mathematical language development that can often be helpful to all learners. ML/EL supports may also be attached to Math Language Routines.onal points within each lesson. These suggested supports are specific, targeted actions that are beneficial for ML/ELs. They often describe a modification to increase access to the task or provide support with contextual or mathematical language development that can often be helpful to all learners. ML/EL supports may also be attached to Math Language Routines.

Math Language Development

Every lesson in Amplify Desmos Math includes opportunities for all students to develop mathematical language as they experience the content. Amplify Desmos Math purposefully progresses language development from lesson to lesson and across units by supporting students in making their arguments and explanations stronger, clearer, and more precise. This systematic approach to the development of math language can be broken down into the following four categories of support:

  • Vocabulary: Units and lessons start by surfacing students’ language for new concepts, then building connections between their language and the new vocabulary for that unit.
  • Language goals: Language goals attend to the mathematics students are learning, and are written through the lens of one or more of four language modalities: reading, writing, speaking, and listening.
  • Math Language Routines: Math Language Routines are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition.
  • Multilingual/English learner supports: Supports for multilingual/English learners (ML/ELs) are called out at intentional points within each lesson.
Two girls sit at a table with open books, one making hand gestures while smiling, the other looking at her and giving a thumbs up. Behind them are shelves filled with books, capturing the lively atmosphere of a math classroom.
Digital educational material showing an activity named "Hamster Homes" involving tube length and platform heights for a hamster cage. Includes a diagram with platforms measuring 9 inches.

K-5 sample materials

Click the links in the drop-down sections below to explore sample materials from each grade. For a full program review, please login to the digital platform or request physical samples.

For helpful navigation tips and more program information, download the Amplify Desmos Math Program Guide.

You can also watch a product expert walk through a lesson and the available program components.

Cover of Amplify Desmos Math Grade K Teacher Edition featuring three children playing with math-related objects and a group of rabbits sitting nearby, aligning with the engaging curriculum seen in New York math classrooms.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 2, Sub-Unit 2: Counting and Comparing Images.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Student Edition Kindergarten," featuring an illustration of three children playing with math-related toys. A group of small white animals, possibly hamsters, play nearby. The scene brilliantly captures the joy of New York math exploration for young learners.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 2, Sub-Unit 2: Counting and Comparing Images.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math Grade K Centers Resources" featuring a large, stylized red and pink "C" on a light pink background with simple geometric designs. This distinctive cover complements New York math curriculums with its engaging visual elements.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A digital activity screen, crafted in the style of Amplify Desmos Math, shows two paths with different quantities of mushrooms. The user is prompted to choose the path with more mushrooms. A bear is on the left side of the screen.

In this lesson, students apply their understanding of how to compare groups of images as they determine which group has more or fewer and then compare their strategies by guiding a bear through a path that has more mushrooms than the other.

Children interact with math activities on a large tablet while observing fish illustrations. The text reads "Amplify Desmos Math Grade 1 Teacher Edition, aligned with New York Math standards.

Skills Unit 2 Teacher Guide

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 1: Adding and Subtracting Within 10.

Illustration of three children engaged in math activities from the "Amplify Desmos Math: Student Edition 1" textbook. One child holds a number card, while the others manipulate counters and images, experiencing an exciting approach inspired by New York math techniques.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 1: Adding and Subtracting Within 10.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math Centers Resources" for Grade 1, featuring a yellow and white 3D letter "C" on a light background.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

An educational game screen, inspired by New York math standards, shows a subtraction problem, "4 - 1," with a frog moving along numbered lily pads to reveal the answer "3.

In this lesson, students find differences when subtracting 1 and 2 from the same number by helping a frog reach a lily pad where it can eat a bug.

Cover of the "Amplify Desmos Math" Grade 2 Teacher Edition, showcasing children measuring with rulers and a poster displaying a mathematical equation, set against whimsical scenery with a colorful dragon. Perfect for New York math classrooms.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you review the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 1: Adding and Subtracting.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math Student Edition 2" showing three children performing a New York math activity with blocks and measurements.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 1: Adding and Subtracting.

Cover of an educational book titled "Amplify Desmos Math Grade 2 Centers Resources" featuring a green "C" on a light green background, perfect for enhancing New York math education.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

An educational activity where users must select the block with the correct number to make a total of 10 using the given block numbers. The UI, inspired by New York math standards, features a caterpillar and two tree stumps to amplify engagement with Desmos Math tools.

Students continue to develop fluency by finding the number that makes 10 by helping a millipede reach its favorite food – a clump of leaves!

Cover of a "Grade 3 Amplify Desmos Math Teacher Edition" book, featuring a cutaway building with diverse students and a teacher working on New York math problems and organizing materials.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you review the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 3: Data on Scaled Graphs.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math Student Edition 3" showcasing illustrated children engaged in various mathematical activities inside a glass house structure, reflecting the dynamic energy of New York math.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 3: Data on Scaled Graphs.

Cover of the Amplify Desmos Math Grade 3 Centers Resources book, featuring a 3D letter "C" in blue and white on a minimalistic background, perfect for aligning with New York math standards.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A page titled "Activity 2" features a table showing counts of rabbits, raccoons, and foxes, an image of animal stickers, and a bar graph representing the number of each animal, designed to amplify your New York math lesson with engaging visual data.

Students compare data represented on bar graphs with different scales by using animal stickers to create scaled bar graphs.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Teacher Edition Grade 4" showing children learning New York Math outdoors, using large mathematical tools and numbers, with one child in a wheelchair.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you review the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 2: Using Factors and Multiples.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Teacher Edition Grade 4" showing children learning New York Math outdoors, using large mathematical tools and numbers, with one child in a wheelchair.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 2: Using Factors and Multiples.

Cover of the "Amplify Desmos Math" Grade 4 Centers Resources book, featuring a large, stylized blue letter "C" on a light blue background. This essential resource for New York math educators ensures engaging and effective instruction.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

Interactive educational activity asking users to determine platform heights using a 3-inch tube. The interface, inspired by Desmos math tools, features a dragging function and feedback system with a checkbox and "Try another" option, amplifying the learning experience.

Students choose tube lengths to connect to platform heights for hamster homes, identifying possible heights using what they know about multiples.

Illustration of three students engaging with various math activities outdoors and around large blocks. Text at the top reads "Amplify Desmos Math, Grade 5, Teacher Edition" - a perfect resource for New York math educators.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you review the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 3: Volume of Solid Figures.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Student Edition, Grade 5" featuring students engaged in various mathematical activities outside, such as block building, measuring, and gardening—a perfect resource aligning with New York math standards.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 1, Sub-Unit 3: Volume of Solid Figures.

Cover image of "Amplify Desmos Math Grade 5 Centers Resources" featuring a large purple letter C on a light purple background, showcasing the innovative approach of Amplify Desmos Math that's making waves in New York math education.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Centers Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

An interactive screen showing an activity about decomposing a figure into prisms, with a touch of Desmos Math integration. The user is asked to drag points to demonstrate the decomposition. Two prism illustrations are displayed, offering a glimpse of New York Math's approach.

Students decompose a figure into rectangular prisms and determine the volume of the figure by adding the volumes of the individual prisms.

6-A1 sample materials

Click the links in the drop-down sections below to explore sample materials from each grade. For a full program review, please login to the digital platform or request physical samples. 

For helpful navigation tips and more program information, download the Amplify Desmos Math Program Guide.

You can also watch a product expert walk through a lesson and the available program components.

A laptop displays a math warm-up activity with shapes and a scale, in front of two Amplify Desmos Math teacher edition books for grades 1 and 7.
Cover of the Grade 6 Amplify Desmos Math Teacher Edition, showcasing students engaging in various mathematical activities around a balance scale with variables, inspired by New York math educational standards.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 1: Solving Equations.

Cover of “Amplify Desmos Math, Student Edition, Grade 6” featuring an illustration of children engaging in various New York math-related activities outdoors.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 1: Solving Equations.

Cover image of "Amplify Desmos Math" for Grade 6, featuring a 3D pink letter "I" and the text "Intervention and Extension Resources." This New York math edition supports students with comprehensive resources.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A digital math activity shows foxes on a seesaw balanced with 18-pound weights. A multiple-choice question and text box ask for the weight of a fox in pounds.

Students use equations and tape diagrams to represent seesaw situations and to determine unknown animal weights, helping them make connections between diagrams that represent equations of the form `x+p=q` or `px=q`.

Cover image of "Amplify Desmos Math Teacher Edition Grade 7" featuring an illustration of students engaging in math-related activities with geometric shapes and construction elements against a New York cityscape background.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 3: Inequalities.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math, Student Edition, Grade 7" showing students engaged in math activities against a cityscape reminiscent of New York, with purple geometric structures and a crane in the background.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 3: Inequalities.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Grade 7 – Intervention and Extension Resources" featuring a stylized 3D "I" on a light purple background, ideal for both New York math and national curricula.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A digital math activity screen shows a character above a number line and a box with the inequality "x > -10" entered. A cursor points to the "Edit my response" button.

Students solve inequalities with positive and negative coefficients to solve a variety of challenges featuring a fictional sheep who eats grass according to an inequality.

Illustration of children engaging in learning activities outdoors near a large slide. The title "Amplify Desmos Math Grade 8 Teacher Edition" is shown at the top, highlighting its relevance to New York math curriculum standards.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 2: Analyzing Numerical Data.

Cover of the "Amplify Desmos Math" Student Edition for Grade 8, featuring students engaging in various mathematical activities in a stylized outdoor New York setting.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from a complete sub-unit on this site: Unit 6, Sub-Unit 2: Analyzing Numerical Data.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math Grade 8: Intervention and Extension Resources" featuring a stylized "I" on a gray background, tailored for New York math standards.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A graph plots four robot colors by height and eye distance; on the right, matching colored robots stand side by side, labeled Red, Purple, Blue, and Green.

Students connect points on a scatter plot with individuals in a population and rows of data in a table. The analysis of scatter plots continues with data about the eye distances and heights of robots.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math: Algebra 1, Teacher Edition" featuring diverse characters engaged in mathematical activities, with a graph and a bridge in the background, illustrating the vibrant energy of New York math.

Teacher Edition

Planning and instructional guidance is visual, organized, and easy-to-follow. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from two complete sub-units on this site: Unit 2, Sub-Units 1–2: One-Variable Equations and Multi-Variable Equations.

Cover of "Amplify Desmos Math" Student Edition A1, featuring an illustration of diverse characters engaging in New York math activities against a backdrop of graphs and mathematical concepts.

Student Edition

Motivate students with mathematics that is both rigorous and delightful. To help you preview the program, we have included samples from two complete sub-units on this site: Unit 2, Sub-Units 1–2: One-Variable Equations and Multi-Variable Equations.

Cover of an Amplify Desmos Math Algebra 1 ancillary sampler, featuring students interacting with graphs and mathematical models, including a rocket and a parabola.

Ancillary sampler

Included in the ancillary sampler are examples from the program Assessment Resources, Intervention and Extension Resources, Additional Practice, and Math Language Development Resources.

A math activity screen shows a cartoon snail, purple blocks, and a table comparing blocks and a math equation; a cursor hovers over the "Edit my response" button.

Students represent the solutions of a situation using a table, a graph, and multiple forms of an equation to identify multiple combinations of blocks that can help Shelley the Snail cross a gap.

Frequently asked questions

Still have questions? We have answers. Check out the following FAQ.

Overview

  • Amplify CKLA is based on research showing that closing the background knowledge gap is necessary for supporting the literacy development of all students. To that end, Amplify CKLA teaches literacy through the lens of cross-curricular domains in science, history, literature, and culture. It was developed in response to research that shows the critical impact of background knowledge on reading comprehension and college- and career-readiness.
  • The program also reflects the latest early reading research showing the importance of explicit foundational skills instruction. The program develops students’ foundational literacy skills through a systematic scope and sequence with a focus on phonics.

Our research-based language arts curriculum is built on findings showing that higher-level reading comprehension depends on both automatic, fluent decoding and background knowledge. Combining well-established findings from the field of early literacy research with classroom-based feedback, Amplify CKLA ensures that children will learn to listen, speak, read, and write confidently and proficiently. For more information, view the Amplify CKLA Research Guide.

Amplify CKLA is a PreK–5 program. While the PreK and K–2 materials respect the important differences between early childhood education and formal schooling, the Grades 3–5 materials ensure a smooth transition to the academic rigors of middle school.

PreK

The focus in PreK is to maintain a developmentally appropriate early childhood setting; the structures, routines, and activities are engaging and children receive a solid foundation for future language arts instruction.

K–2

The focus in K–2 is developing fluent reading and writing skills, and enhancing language comprehension by building background knowledge and vocabulary. This is accomplished through two strands: the Skills Strand and the Knowledge Strand.

The Skills Strand focuses on decoding, encoding, grammar, handwriting, and the writing process, and it contains decodable chapter books for students to practice just-learned sound-spellings.

The Knowledge Strand builds background knowledge and vocabulary through carefully sequenced read-alouds and complex texts. Teachers read aloud stories that are more complex than the text students can decode on their own, enabling children to engage with complex texts and build background knowledge of a variety of connected topics in history, science, literature, and the arts.

3–5

In Grades 3–5, students are still focused on building reading and writing skills as well as knowledge and vocabulary, but the program no longer has two strands. The various lessons in each unit include read-alouds; whole-group, small-group, and partner reading; close reading; literal, inferential, and evaluative comprehension questions; vocabulary; grammar; writing; morphology and spelling (10–15 words per week); and unit assessments.

Program design

The Skills strand provides intentional and systematic support in building decoding skills. The lessons support learning related to phonemic awareness, sound-letter patterns (or spelling patterns), decoding (both in explicit lessons and with engaging decodable texts), writing mechanics, and writing structure and processes, for 60 minutes daily.

The Knowledge Strand develops young children’s language and background knowledge. By exposing children to rich and complex texts through daily read-alouds, engaging in text-based and analytic discussions of the text and content, and building connections from the text to the work of the classroom through extension activities, the Knowledge Strand provides daily, extensive (60 minutes) broadening and deepening of children’s oral language and comprehension.

Teaching the Skills Strand and Knowledge Strand in parallel helps students avoid cognitive overload and acquire advanced, complex vocabulary in the Knowledge Strand—in essence, reading to learn from day one—while becoming expert decoders in the Skills Strand. The program is designed to bring these two strands together in grades 3–5, as foundational skills and higher-level comprehension and meaning-making gradually intertwine.

The CKLA program takes a comprehensive approach to teaching the code of the English language in the Skills strand. While the English language has only 26 letters, these letters combine to create 150 spelling patterns that represent 44 sounds of language. In most reading programs, children are explicitly taught only a fraction of this information and must glean the rest from ad hoc and incidental exposure to these spelling patterns through text. CKLA focuses on explicitly teaching each of the 44 sounds and the 150 ways that these sounds are represented (via letters and letter combinations). This comprehensive approach assures educators that children have the knowledge they need to address any text and any word.

The Knowledge Strand reflects the fact that knowledge, comprehension, and vocabulary are intimately related. The materials are designed to provide children sustained time on a variety of domains (bodies of knowledge) through shared read-alouds and discussions. This coherent organization of content is critical to building knowledge, inferring new vocabulary, and enabling comprehension. The content-rich, intentionally sequenced nature of the read-alouds within the Knowledge Strand creates the optimal context for incidental and explicit vocabulary-learning opportunities. After the read-aloud, children analyze the text through interactive discussion questions, engage in activities that foster their comprehension of complex sentences and ideas, and extend the ideas of the read-aloud into other activities in the classroom. In this way, the lessons create rich, academically oriented, oral language experiences that promote both receptive and expressive language skills.

Amplify CKLA embeds a variety of diagnostic and classroom assessments into the program materials.

There are curriculum-based assessments of both foundational skills and content knowledge, placement assessments in Grades 1 and 2 for the Skills Strand, and end-of-year Skills Strand assessments in Grades K–3. These assessments are built into the units of instruction/domains within the Teacher Guides. In Grades 4–5, there are beginning-of-year assessments, frequent spelling assessments, and comprehensive unit assessments.

Formative Assessments are integrated into every lesson, allowing teachers to understand exactly how students are doing on meeting lesson goals and standards-based objectives.

Writing in multiple genres is taught through a process that builds from three highly scaffolded steps to seven flexible steps.
In addition to explicit lessons in handwriting, spelling, and grammar, writing is taught throughout K–5. Instruction begins with a three-step writing process: plan, draft, and edit. The process is reinforced as each new writing genre is addressed. Each genre is taught through a gradual reduction in scaffolding over a set of six lessons that includes teacher modeling, group practice, independent practice, and independent application. This systematic approach allows for continued support and predictable learning as children progress in their knowledge of text types and complexity of writing. By Grade 3, students have worked their way up to a five-step writing process: planning, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. Beginning in Grade 4, the writing process expands to seven components: planning, drafting, sharing, evaluating, revising, and editing (and the optional component of publishing). An important change between the writing process in Grades 3–5 is that the writing process is no longer conceptualized as a series of scaffolded, linear steps that students follow in a set sequence. Rather, students move back and forth between components of the writing process in a flexible manner, similar to the process that mature and experienced writers follow. In addition to specific writing lessons, there are numerous writing opportunities for students throughout the curriculum.

Alignment to the CCSS

Fully implementing the Common Core Standards requires some shifts in prevailing instructional approaches. For early grades language arts, these shifts can be summarized as (1) balancing fiction and nonfiction text, (2) building knowledge, (3) supporting students’ capacity to learn from increasingly complex texts, (4) giving text-based answers, (5) writing from sources, and (6) explicitly supporting the acquisition of academic vocabulary. The following sections document the primary ways that Amplify CKLA meets the demands of these shifts.

  1. The amount of nonfiction gradually increases, reaching the 50-50 balance of fiction and nonfiction by grade 3.
  2. Read-alouds in the Knowledge Strand are designed according to the latest research to build knowledge and vocabulary in history, science, the arts, and more.
  3. The texts in both the Knowledge Strand and the Skills strand increase in complexity as the program progresses within and across grades.
  4. In the Skills Strand, the language and knowledge demands of the texts increase, but remain decodable based on the aspects of the code that have been taught to date.
  5. Both strands engage students in appropriate means of providing text-based answers—orally, pictorially, and eventually in writing.
  6. Together, the Skills and Knowledge Strands enable students to read and digest various sources and then write by drawing on those sources.
  7. In both strands of the program, Amplify CKLA teaches children the process of using the text as a springboard for understanding.
  8. The Knowledge Strand offers repeated exposures to academic vocabulary through authentic texts and explicit word instruction.

Materials

PreK

  • Teacher Guides, Student Activity Pages, 3–4 Trade Books per domain, Flip Books, Image Cards, Transition and Center Cards, Nursery Rhymes and Songs Posters, and a Big Book (Classic Tales)

Grades K–2

  • Knowledge Strand: Teacher Guides, Flip Books, Student Activity Books, Image Cards, and online resources including supplemental lessons
  • Skills Strand: Teacher Guides, Activity Books, Student Readers, Big Books, Letter Cards, Spelling Cards, Individual Code Sheets, Code and Chaining Resources (Vowel/Consonant Code Flip Books, Student Chaining Folders), Blending Cards, and online resources including differentiation and remediation guides

Grades 3–5

  • Teacher Guides, Student Readers, Activity Books, Poet’s Journal, Writer’s Journal, Core Quests (The Viking Age in Grade 3, Eureka: Student Inventor in Grade 4 and “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” in grade 5) and Writing Quests (The Contraption in Grade 4, The Robot in Grade 5)

Welcome to Amplify CKLA!

Amplify Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA) is a cutting-edge and effective core ELA program for students in grades K–5. It was developed in partnership with the Core Knowledge Foundation, features proven evidence-based instructional practices, and was specifically designed to help teachers implement Science of Reading principles.

Note: We’re continually adding information to this site, including specific details regarding our alignment with your non-negotiables. Keep checking back with us between now and April 20, 2023.

Getting Started

On this site, you’ll find a variety of resources designed to support your review and evaluation of the program. Before you dive in, watch the Orientation Overview and Program Overview videos below to learn about CKLA’s alignment to CCSD’s ELA adoption requirements, as well as where to find key program resources.

[Video] Orientation Overview

[Video] Program Overview

In the video below, learn about CKLA’s structure and materials, as well the research behind the curriculum.

Evidence-Based

[Video] Pedagogical Overview with Simple View of Reading

In the video below, Amplify’s Chief Academic Officer Susan Lambert shares the big picture of CKLA, and explains why it was created and the impact it’s making across the country. Below are a few portions of the video that you may find particularly helpful as you conduct your review.

  • 0-1:00 Why CKLA?
  • 1:00-4:40 How CKLA was built on the Simple View of Reading
  • 4:40-8:00 How to review the CKLA Components
  • 8:00-end Teacher Testimonial

[Features] Supporting the Simple View of Reading

Built out of the latest research in the Science of Reading, Amplify CKLA delivers explicit instruction in both foundational literacy skills (systematic phonics, decoding, and fluency) and background knowledge in grades K–2 with an integrated approach to explicit instruction in grades 3–5.

Review this Science of Reading toolkit to learn more about the Science of Reading best practices integrated throughout CKLA.

See our Science of Reading solutions in action! Click here to see a real example of how one Ohio district is implementing and educating their K–8 community on the Science of Reading as a response to Ohio’s Plan to Raise Literacy Achievement Initiative.

Great reading instruction starts with helping kids develop great decoding skills. By building a solid foundation of phonological awareness and phonics, reading the words on the page becomes automatic so that comprehension and critical thinking can happen. Our instruction is supported by:

  • Step-by-step lessons with multisensory approaches, clear lesson objectives, and embedded formative assessments.
  • Decodable books and student readers with ebook and audiobook versions that feature engaging plots and relatable characters.
  • An engaging sound library with fun songs and videos that develop phonological awareness.
  • An interactive Vocab App featuring engaging activities with immediate feedback and automated, customized instruction based on student performance.

Students build grade-appropriate subject-area knowledge and vocabulary in history, science, literature, and the arts while learning to read, write, and think creatively and for themselves. Our instruction is supported by:

  • Knowledge builders that provide a quick overview of each domain with its key ideas.
  • Interactive Read-Alouds designed to build knowledge and vocabulary.
  • Content-rich anchor texts that support students as they tackle increasingly complex text and sharpen their analytical skills.
  • Social and emotional learning paired with lessons in civic responsibility.

Easy-to-Use Materials

Amplify CKLA offers a number of digital and multimedia resources to support instruction and enhance the teacher and student experience.

  • Amplify CKLA Digital Experience Site: All teacher and student materials are posted on this site for planning and information purposes, including Teacher Guides, Readers, Activity Books, Ancillary Materials, videos, additional resources, and links to other useful sites, such as the Professional Learning site.
  • The Professional Learning Site: This site includes training materials, best practices, and other resources to develop program expertise. Access professional development anywhere, anytime.
  • Intervention Toolkit: The Intervention Toolkit provides easy-to use resources to assist teachers in filling gaps in students’ foundational skills. Teachers will find hundreds of activities to support phonics, fluency, comprehension, handwriting, and other key skills.
  • The Science of Reading: The Podcast: Hosted by Susan Lambert, The Podcast delivers the latest insights from researchers and practitioners in early reading. Each episode takes a conversational approach and explores a timely topic related to the Science of Reading.

In addition to the videos below, our CKLA Components Guide can be a helpful tool as you explore the materials provided within your sample tubs.

[Video] Physical Materials Walkthrough

As you explore your physical samples, the material walkthrough video below can be a helpful resource. In particular, we suggest watching the following portions of the video.

  • 0-4:38 CKLA components for K–2
  • 4:38-7:00 CKLA components for 3–5
  • 7-7:30 CKLA Program Guide
  • 10:12-13:20 CKLA’s Teacher Resource Site

Note: The below video covers both our K-5 program (Amplify CKLA) as well as our 6-8 program (Amplify ELA).

[Video] Digital Materials Walkthrough

In the video below, learn about CKLA’s digital tools for teachers and students across both classroom and asynchronous environments.

As you prepare to explore our digital platform, be sure to watch and refer to the video below.

Diverse Texts

In Amplify CKLA, texts serve a variety of purposes, from building background knowledge, vocabulary, and comprehension to building decoding and fluency skills.

In grades K–2, instruction is segmented between two strands: Knowledge and Skills.

  • Reading within the Knowledge Strand is centered around authentic read-alouds and trade books that are intentionally sequenced to build content knowledge and vocabulary in specific domain topics around literature, history, science, and the arts. Because research shows that students’ listening comprehension outpaces their reading comprehension until their early teens, Amplify CKLA strategically uses read-aloud text in this strand, allowing students to focus their cognitive energy on gaining meaning from the words and better understanding from the images.
  • Reading within the Skills Strand centers around carefully crafted Student Readers that teach students how to read. Structured as chapter books, these readers are 100% decodable and were developed to align with Amplify CKLA’s scope and sequence for phonics, directly connecting instruction to student practice in connected texts. Students use the Readers to practice decoding, fluency, and comprehension during shared reading lessons, targeted close reading sessions, in small groups, and independently.

In grades 3–5, integrated units bring the Skills and Knowledge strands together as students become increasingly automatic and strategic in their word recognition and language comprehension skills. Student reading and comprehension activities involve a variety of reading materials:

  • Authentic Read-Alouds and trade books ensure students encounter a variety of perspectives as they use these complex text to increase their knowledge while practicing vocabulary and listening comprehension skills.
  • Student Readers connect to each theme and are designed to increase in complexity over time, providing a continual challenge as students’ reading and listening comprehension skills develop and strengthen throughout the year.
  • Novel Guides provide teachers a flexible option for extending authentic reading and text-based activities in the classroom using award-winning and acclaimed novels.
  • ReadWorks articles give students access to additional high-quality texts aligned to both Amplify CKLA knowledge topics and the topics outlined in the Common Core State Standards.

Decodable Readers at Grades K–2

Our Decodable Readers are designed to progress in skills, mirroring the scope and sequence of instruction, which allows students to immediately apply what they are learning to 100% decodable text. More specifically, our decodables:

  • Are uniquely designed to provide intensive practice with the CKLA code while students read compelling and engaging stories and informational texts for the first time.
  • Gradually introduce students to “tricky” spelling concepts, such as different sounds that use the same letter code.
  • Increase in text complexity (i.e., content, length, and vocabulary) as students progress through the grades.
  • Include fiction and nonfiction text.
  • Are available as ebooks and audiobooks.

Below, you can see how students grow from year-to-year across grades K–2.

Student Readers at Grades 3–5

By grades 3–5, students have mastered the basics of decoding and are hungry to use what they’ve learned to reach out to the world. Although Read-Alouds remain an important part of lessons, students are also encouraged to practice independent reading starting in grade 3 with the support of carefully crafted Student Readers. These readers are chock-full of various text types, cultural stories, and a blend of fiction and nonfiction texts that are tied to and support the overarching theme of the unit.

Read-alouds

Authentic literature exposes students to a variety of text types and perspectives to deepen their knowledge of fascinating topics in social studies, science, literature, and the arts. Authentic texts support text-to-self, text-to-world, and text-to-text connections for readers.

Trade books

Our optional Trade Book Collection (and suggested list of additional trade books) align with our grade-level topics, and extend the knowledge students are learning through an authentic text.

Novel Guides

Novel Guides bring students beyond the CKLA curriculum. We provide fifteen full days of instruction on contemporary trade books, as well as writing prompts that help students navigate the authentic literature they love.

ReadWorks

Amplify CKLA and ReadWorks® have partnered to deliver high-quality texts curated to support the Amplify CKLA Knowledge Sequence and to extend student learning. Texts include high-interest nonfiction articles in topics in social studies, science, literature, and the arts. These texts are accompanied by vocabulary supports and standards-aligned formative assessment opportunities. Teachers can monitor their students’ progress using the ReadWorks reporting features.

Reading resources

The following resources may be helpful as you explore our approach to reading and the role that diverse texts play in the program.

Writing

CKLA is rich with opportunities for students to develop, practice, and hone their writing skills. While the shape of writing instruction looks slightly different at each grade level, a commonality across all grades K–5 is that writing isn’t taught in isolation. Rather, it’s embedded within the context of each unit, and is connected to what students read.

At Grades K–2, writing takes place in both the Skills and Knowledge strands.

  • Explicit instruction in writing skills (such as sentence structure) and handwriting takes place in the Skills Strand, and is tied to the decodable readers used within each unit.
  • Extended writing and writing process activities take place in the Knowledge Strand.

At Grades 3–5, writing is embedded through the integrated units.

  • Across each unit, students work on smaller, more discrete writing skills alongside their Student Reader. These skills eventually culminate at the end of each unit in the form of a writing project.
  • In 4th and 5th grades, we expand writing even further with the addition of Poetry units.

Writing and text-dependent questions

The overwhelming majority of questions, tasks, and assignments in CKLA materials are text-dependent. Every CKLA unit and domain is based around key texts that are either read aloud, with a peer, or independently. These readings are followed by class discussions where students are expected to refer to these texts when answering literal, inferential, and evaluative questions, both orally during class discussions and through written responses.

  • Literal questions assess students’ recall of key details from the text. These are text-dependent questions that require students to paraphrase and/or refer back to the portion of the text where the specific answer is provided.
  • Inferential questions ask students to infer information from the text and to think critically. These text-dependent questions require students to summarize and/or reference the portions of the text that lead to and support the inference they are making.
  • Evaluative questions ask students to build on what they have learned from the text using analytical and application skills, often to form an opinion or make a judgment. These questions require students to paraphrase and/or cite the textual evidence that substantiates their argument or opinion.

In addition, students are often asked to generate additional questions based on the texts. Students further demonstrate understanding in writing by applying what they have learned and providing evidence from the text to back up their answers and opinions. For example, Grade 3 students learning about sea exploration write a paragraph from the perspective of a sailor on John Cabot’s ship, stating their opinion of whether the hardships they experienced are worth the adventure or glory and citing examples from the text to support their response. Grade 5 students studying the Adventures of Don Quixote write a four-paragraph persuasive essay arguing whether they believe Don Quixote’s good intentions justify his often calamitous actions, using reasons and evidence from the text to support their claims.

Writing with authentic literature

Novel Guides are designed around authentic texts students love. They not only help students foster a love for reading, they also present authentic opportunities for students to express themselves through writing. Novel Guides provide daily text-based writing and discussion through five activity types:

  • Ask contains questions for discussion, reflection, or brief written responses. These questions cover information all students should understand as they read the text.
  • Explore prompts offer brief research opportunities centered around items mentioned in the text.
  • Imagine activities promote creativity and further reflection.
  • Observe items ask students to take notes or make other kinds of observations about what they have read.
  • Understand questions push students to explore connections to the text.

Writing and enrichment

Writing tasks throughout the program provide almost limitless opportunities for extension. Feedback from the teacher, peers, and self-reflection provide students opportunities to strengthen their writing. For example, advanced students can be encouraged to:

  • Use more complex and unusual descriptive vocabulary.
  • Incorporate figurative language into their writing.
  • Write multi-clause sentences with more complex joining words.
  • Create longer or richer opinion, explanatory, and narrative pieces.
  • Evaluate the use of informational textual characteristics and use in their own writing (e.g., headers, bullets).

Writing resources

The following resources may be helpful as you explore our approach to writing and how writing develops across the program.

Access the program

Explore as a teacher

Before logging in, watch this brief video on navigating the CKLA Teacher Resource Site.

Ready to explore as a teacher? Follow these instructions:

  • Click the CKLA Teacher Resource Site button below.
  • Select Log in with Amplify.
  • Enter the username: t1.ccsd-k5-ckla@demo.tryamplify.net
  • Enter the password: Amplify1-ccsd-k5-ckla
  • Click the CKLA Teacher Resource icon
  • Select a grade level

Explore as a student

Before logging in, watch this brief video on navigating the CKLA Student Hub.

Ready to explore as a student? Follow these instructions:

  • Click the CKLA Teacher Resource Site button below.
  • Select Log in with Amplify.
  • Enter the username: s1.ccsd-k5-ckla@demo.tryamplify.net
  • Enter the password: Amplify1-ccsd-k5-ckla
  • Click the CKLA Teacher Resource icon
  • Select a grade level

Check out these additional resources

Nevada submission resources:

CKLA review resources:

Utah ELA Review for Grades 6–8

Thank you for taking the time to review Amplify’s core ELA program for middle school.

Amplify ELA is a blended English language arts curriculum designed specifically for grades 6–8. With Amplify ELA, students learn to tackle complex text, make observations, grapple with interesting ideas, and find reading relevance for themselves.

Illustration of a diverse group of people and nature elements, featuring a prominent figure with floral hair decorations and a scene of communal interaction in the background.

Step 1: Program Introduction

Welcome to Amplify ELA! Before you dive into our materials, watch the video below to learn about Amplify ELA’s unique instructional design, built specifically for middle schoolers.

Step 2: Program Overview

Amplify ELA is a core curriculum designed to deliver a unique research-based approach designed to get all students reading grade-level text together.

Watch the overview video below to get an in-depth look at the program’s overall structure and organization, the design behind our proven lessons, and the materials included to support teaching and learning.

The Amplify ELA Program Guide also provides an in-depth view of how Amplify ELA works, how it’s structured, and why it’s uniquely capable of helping you bring evidence-based instructional practices to life in the middle school classroom.

Evidence-based design

Amplify ELA is rooted in extensive research in learning, cognition, and how middle school students develop literacy skills.

As such, Amplify ELA features four research-based principles of engagement that support teachers in meeting key developmental needs, and help students become confident, active learners. In addition, Amplify ELA has been proven to drive outcomes for middle school students. Read the ESSA studies below to learn more.

Key features

Amplify ELA’s new, hybrid curriculum empowers teachers to decide when and how their students use technology without the worry of compromising learning. Whether implemented in high tech, low tech, or no tech classrooms, teachers can easily and confidently provide 100% standards coverage.

Download the Remote and hybrid learning guide to learn how we support in-person, remote, and hybrid instruction.

Amplify ELA’s structured yet flexible lessons are grounded in regular routines while still allowing for a variety of learning experiences and continuous student engagement.

Take a closer look at the program’s structure and the sequence of activity types that appear in a typical lesson.

Amplify ELA features high-quality lessons grounded in great books, with powerful multimedia tools to immerse young adolescents in reading, writing, and speaking.

Our rich and relevant texts are more than just excerpts. With more than 700 full titles in our digital library plus a variety of Novel Guides, Amplify ELA engages and inspires middle schoolers with great works, including poetry, rhetoric, and Spanish selections.

Based on individual student needs and performance measures within Amplify ELA reports, teachers are able to select the differentiation level that’s best for each student. When students reach an activity, the platform delivers the assigned differentiation, allowing all students to experience the same lesson with supports tailored to their unique needs.

What’s more, when logging in each morning, teachers will be greeted by their Amplify ELA Homescreen where they can view a snapshot of student performance, access reports, see which students are struggling, and easily return to where they left off the day before.

  • Our close reading apps bring texts to life for students. Students zoom in on specific moments of the text and map out character traits, trace emotions throughout a text, and gather evidence to build a case. These apps are also flexible so teachers can create their own activities for Amplify ELA core texts, texts in the library, and texts they bring in from other sources.
  • The Vocab App strengthens vocabulary skills with fun and fully differentiated adaptive games, repeated encounters with new words across multiple contexts, and an interactive stats page that helps students track their own progress.
  • Quests are fun, week-long explorations that help students practice analytical reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills while building a strong classroom community. In each Quest, students step into the world of the text they have been reading. They interact with different complex texts in multiple formats and media, gather evidence from these texts and interactions with classmates, and work together to achieve the Quest goal.

With Amplify ELA, your students will benefit from embedded assessments that maximize instructional time and allow them to keep learning without the disruption of step-away performance tests.

In addition, as students complete activities within lessons and units, Amplify ELA teacher and admin reports provide a continuously updated picture of how each student is progressing with key skills and standards. Data is gathered from daily learning moments, allowing you to keep teaching while building a clear understanding of student performance.

Providing feedback has never been easier. With Classwork, teachers can review student writing and multiple choice answers and easily add scores and comments (and even emojis) all in one place, giving students the immediate feedback they need to further develop their confidence and literacy skills.

Step 3: Program Resources

Digital navigation walkthrough

Physical materials walkthrough

Step 4: State Review Resources

Utah submission resources:

ELA review resources:

Step 5: Program Access

Explore as a teacher

Before logging in, watch this brief video on navigating the Amplify ELA Teacher Platform.

Ready to explore as a teacher? Follow these instructions:

  • Click the Amplify ELA Teacher Platform button below.
  • Select Log in with Amplify.
  • Enter the teacher username and password found on the login flyer PDF.
  • Click the ELA icon.
  • Select a grade level from the drop-down menu at the top of the page.

Explore as a student

Before logging in, watch this brief video on navigating the Amplify ELA Student Platform.

Ready to explore as a student? Follow these instructions:

  • Click the Amplify ELA Student Platform button below.
  • Select Log in with Amplify.
  • Enter the student username and password found on the login flyer PDF.
  • Click the ELA icon.
  • Select a grade level from the drop-down menu at the top of the page.

What’s included in our literacy curriculum for 6–8

Amplify ELA is a blended literacy curriculum designed specifically for grades 6–8. The heart of every lesson is the text. Our core English Language Arts curriculum enables teachers to teach skills through texts and develop their students’ muscles for building meaning through reading. With Amplify ELA, students learn to attack any complex text and make observations, grapple with interesting ideas, and find relevance for themselves.

Year at a glance

Each grade includes six core units centered on literary or informational texts, delivered in several forms of media. In addition to these main units, students will engage with targeted Grammar lessons and a dedicated Story Writing unit, plus two to three immersive learning experiences called Quests.

Dahl & Narrative

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 28 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Mysteries & Investigations

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 32 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Chocolate Collection

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

The Greeks

Myth World Quest

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Summer of the Mariposas

1 assessment lesson
2 sub-units | 27 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Titanic Collection

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Red Scarf Girl

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 31 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Character & Conflict

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 29 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Brain Science

Perception Academy Quest

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Poetry & Poe

The “Who Killed Edgar Allen Poe” Quest

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 29 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Frida & Diego Collection

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Gold Rush Collection

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Perspectives & Narrative

1 assessment lesson
4 sub-units | 27 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Liberty & Equality

1 assessment lesson
6 sub-units | 38 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Science & Science Fiction

1 assessment lesson
3 sub-units | 29 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet

1 assessment lesson
2 sub-units | 22 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Holocaust: Memory & Meeting

1 assessment lesson
6 sub-units | 21 lessons | 4-6 weeks

A man with a mustache looks through a microscope at a slide, with abstract yellow lines in the background.

The Space Race Collection

1 assessment lesson
5 sub-units | 25 lessons | 4-6 weeks

Units at a glance

Amplify ELA lessons follow a structure both grounded in regular routines and flexible enough to allow for a variety of learning experiences. Lesson structures vary from day to day, ensuring that students are always engaged.

Learn more in the Amplify ELA Grade Overview.

Unit 6A

Dahl & Narrative

Students begin with narrative writing to develop foundational Focus skills and establish key classroom routines. Teachers use this work to create targeted feedback cycles and build a vibrant community centered on diverse experiences. Students then apply observational skills to Roald Dahl’s Boy: Tales of Childhood, learning to work closely with textual evidence.

Unit 6B

Mysteries & Investigations

Students read like an investigator to embark on a multi-genre study into the mesmerizing world of scientific and investigative sleuthing. The Secret of the Yellow Death: A True Story of Medical Sleuthing by Suzanne Jurmain, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories take place in the late 19th century, when medical diagnostics and criminal investigations were still evolving into scientific fields.

Unit 6C

The Chocolate Collection

Students explore primary documents and research the diverse cultural roles chocolate has played over 3,700 years, from its various uses in ancient Mexico to issues with modern production. Along the way, they build information literacy skills, craft research questions, and collaborate in Socratic seminars. Students also learn how to construct an evidence-based argument and use those skills to write pieces aimed at convincing readers about chocolate preferences, school lunch policies, and recommendations for local candy stores.

Unit 6D

The Greeks

Students closely explore and analyze three stories from Greek mythology: “Prometheus,” “Odysseus,” and “Arachne.” Drawing on the routines and skills established in previous units, these lessons ask students to move from considering the state of a single person to contemplating broader questions concerning the role people play in the world and the various communities they inhabit.

Unit 6E

Summer of the Mariposas

Students read Summer of the Mariposas by Guadalupe García McCall, a contemporary Latino retelling of The Odyssey. Following five sisters on their journey into Mexico and back, students explore this reimagining of the hero’s journey as they encounter Mexican folklore and Aztec legends along the way. Students analyze character development, compare the novel to Homer’s original, research Aztec mythology, explore symbolism, and engage in collaborative discussions before writing an essay about what makes the heroes successful.

Unit 6F

The Titanic Collection

Students explore primary documents and conduct research to understand the 1912 Titanic disaster, building information literacy skills by examining artifacts such as dining menus, ship photos, telegraph transcripts, and newspaper accounts. Each student is assigned a passenger from the manifest and writes a narrative account from that person’s perspective, considering different views. Students also participate in Socratic seminars to examine the complicated issues within the Titanic story.

Unit 7A

Red Scarf Girl & Narrative

Students begin with narrative writing to develop foundational Focus skills while teachers establish targeted feedback cycles and build a classroom community centered on diverse experiences. After exploring how they describe their own experiences and emotions, students apply the same close attention to analyzing details in Ji-li Jiang’s Red Scarf Girl: A Memoir of the Cultural Revolution.

Unit 7B

Character & Conflict

Students analyze characters’ responses to conflict and examine how authors use character interactions to develop theme and perspective. They read Carson McCullers’ “Sucker” and Lorraine Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun, both texts that explore how families facing hardships can support and harm one another. Students observe complex character growth and discuss issues of identity, family obligations, and differing notions of success.

Unit 7C

Brain Science

Students explore narrative nonfiction and informational texts about brain science to understand what it means to be human and how their developing brains impact daily experiences. They also build awareness of their cognitive strengths and analyze the structures of informational texts and scientific arguments. Key texts include Phineas Gage, Inventing Ourselves: The Secret Life of the Teenage Brain, and Oliver Sacks’ The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat.

Unit 7D

Poetry & Poe

Students learn visualization techniques to read like a movie director, beginning with poems by D.H. Lawrence, Federico García Lorca, and Emily Dickinson to form mental images. They then read three Edgar Allan Poe texts, creating storyboards and analyzing narrative elements to learn about unreliable narrators. Students also participate in the murder-mystery Quest “Who Killed Edgar Allan Poe?” and write an essay arguing whether they can trust a narrator in the unit’s texts.

Unit 7E

The Frida & Diego Collection

Students explore primary source documents and research on Mexican artists Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo, learning how they drew inspiration from Latin American folklore, politics, and customs. Along the way, students build information literacy by generating research questions and visual analysis skills through close reading of key paintings. They also compare the artists’ descriptive writing to Shakespeare’s and analyze figurative language. The unit culminates in a research project showcasing their interpretation of Frida and Diego’s work and legacy.

Unit 7F

The Gold Rush Collection

Students explore primary documents and conduct research on the California Gold Rush, building information literacy skills and constructing research questions. They also learn about the diverse people who participated, compare fictional and historical accounts, and participate in Socratic seminars. Students write narrative accounts from specific perspectives and complete a culminating research assignment combining essay and media project elements.

Unit 8A

Perspectives & Narrative

Students learn to read like writers, paying attention to craft and writing moves that shape reader experience and developing Focus and Showing skills as they build collaborative classroom routines. Students study three narrative texts, exploring themes of belonging and identity through close reading. They also practice alternating between analytic and narrative writing, and conclude with an essay arguing whether the mothers in Amy Tan’s “Fish Cheeks” are role models. 

Unit 8B

Liberty & Equality

Students study Civil War-era writings that debate the meaning of “all men are created equal,” exploring various perspectives on American ideals. Key texts include Walt Whitman’s Leaves of Grass, Frederick Douglass’ Narrative, and Harriet Ann Jacobs’s Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. The unit culminates with an essay examining Douglass’s arguments and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to consider what America means by “all men are created equal.”

Unit 8C

Science & Science Fiction

Students read Gris Grimly’s Frankenstein, a graphic novel adaptation of Mary Shelley’s novel, exploring themes of creator responsibility, societal influence, and the risks of scientific inquiry. They trace Victor’s sympathy for his creation, rewrite scenes from the creature’s perspective, and debate whether Victor owes the creature a companion. The unit concludes with an essay determining whether the creature should be considered human.

Unit 8D

Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet

Students read five excerpts from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet to learn key elements of Shakespearean English through close reading. They practice memorizing and reciting the famous “Prologue,” put on stage performances, translate Shakespeare’s language into contemporary terms, and study the Shakespearean sonnet form. The unit concludes with an essay arguing whether love or hate is responsible for Romeo’s death.

Unit 8E

Holocaust: Memory & Meaning

Students use close reading to explore memoirs and primary sources that address two key Holocaust questions: How do societies become participants in atrocity, and what are our responsibilities as witnesses? Students analyze multiple perspectives through texts, including Alexander Kimel’s “I Cannot Forget,” Irene Butter’s Shores Beyond Shores, 1936 Olympics propaganda, and excerpts from Maus and Night.

Unit 8F

The Space Race Collection

Students explore primary documents and conduct research on the Space Race. They build information literacy skills, construct research questions, and learn about diverse participants from Soviet cosmonauts to American heroes like Buzz Aldrin and Katherine Johnson. Each student researches an assigned cosmonaut or astronaut and writes space blog entries from their perspective. Students also complete a capstone research essay and media project.

Print & digital components

The program includes instructional guidance and student materials for a year of instruction, with lessons and activities that keep students engaged every day.

A diagram shows the Amplify ELA curriculum with examples of the digital teacher edition on a tablet, print teacher edition pages, and a teacher projection of an artwork on a screen.

Teacher materials

Teacher Edition

Available digitally and in print, the Teacher’s Edition contains all the information teachers need to facilitate classroom instruction, including detailed lesson plans, video teacher tips, presentation slides, standards alignment, Exit Tickets, real-time differentiation strategies, and robust reporting.

Student materials

Student Edition

Available digitally and in print, student materials guide middle schoolers through complex texts and writing by engaging them with high-quality narrative and informational texts—providing videos, audio supports, and a digital experience that captures their attention. They also keep all of their writing in one place with a personal Writing Journal.

A collection of Amplify ELA materials including a print student edition, a digital student edition on a laptop, a writing journal, and an Arachne literature module.

Explore more programs

Our programs are designed to support and complement one another. Learn more about our related programs.

The science behind our skills instruction

Every day in the Amplify CKLA K–2 classrooms, students practice their existing reading skills while stretching themselves toward new goals.

Regardless their grade level, all students will experience Skills instruction that is:

  • Reserach-based: The program is built out of an exhaustive review of reading research, with special emphasis on the findings of the National Reading Panel, Diane McGuinness, Marilyn Jager Adams, and Louisa Moats.
  • Explicit: All 44 sounds and their 150 spellings in the English language are taught, practiced, and mastered in diverse settings.
  • Sequential: An intentional sequence of instruction that gradually builds in complexity ensures students master concepts and gain independence before moving forward.
  • Rewarding: Decodable chapter-books and engaging stories featuring dynamic plots and characters inspire kids to read more.

In addition, Skills instruction within the program reflects four key principles.

All Amplify CKLA skills instruction starts with phonological awareness, which research shows benefits the greatest number of students. Students begin by learning to recognize sounds, as well as to articulate them.

Una guía detallada sobre la integración de habilidades, con aspectos destacados que incluyen oportunidades de evaluación, enfoque en la interacción profesor-alumno, sesiones de práctica y pasos para involucrar a los estudiantes en el aprendizaje.

Sound Library
The Sound Library provides additional digital support and practice. Sound videos show mouth movements to help students practice articulating new sounds, while sound songs have fun, catchy lyrics that help kids learn to recognize the sounds they’ve just learned.

Once students are familiar with a sound, they’ll learn to analyze it in terms of phonemes, which begins to build the bridge between sounds and letter codes. We support you and your students with a variety of techniques and remediations designed to integrate well into your existing classroom.

Once students can recognize sounds, they learn to form the corresponding letter codes. Amplify CKLA starts by teaching the sound-spellings that appear most frequently in English, which lets your students read and write as many words as possible, as soon as possible.

Amplify CKLA lessons continue to challenge students as they progress, introducing complications like multisyllabic words, “tricky words,” and homophones. In each case, students encounter complications as they become ready for them.

Una página de texto educativo con secciones sobre escritura, gestos multimodales y práctica de morfología. El cuadro "Verificar comprensión" y las páginas de actividades 6.2 y 5.4 están resaltados.

In addition, as students progress through the grades, skills practice continues but becomes integrated with the overall curriculum.

Proven resources for practicing skills

Great reading instruction starts with helping kids develop great reading skills.

In addition to separating skill development lessons from lessons that emphasize comprehension, Amplify CKLA utilizes carefully crafted resources that give kids confidence. As a result, the program helps student develop the foundational skills they need without delaying them from learning key vocabulary and critical thinking skills.

As students move through the curriculum, their understanding of the code becomes more sophisticated. That’s in large part due to Amplify CKLA’s decodable readers that grow more advanced along with students’ skills.

Un hombre sostiene un perro amarillo mientras una mula mira por la ventana. El texto narra los sentimientos de la mula al ser excluida porque el hombre trata mejor al perro.

Throughout the K–2 Skills units, we ask students to practice their writing skills along with their reading. Student book reports on the readers and other reflective assignments help build good writing habits early and prepare students for the challenges ahead.

Skills scopes and sequences by grade

Download scopes and sequences for each grade below.

Dyslexia supports within Amplify CKLA

Amplify CKLA is based on decades of cognitive science and classroom-based research and includes phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency as central literacy components.

The International Dyslexia Association defines Structured Literacy as an approach that focuses on systematic and explicit instruction in word identification and decoding, and includes the following elements: phonology, sound-symbol association, syllables, morphology, syntax, semantics. Further, Structured Literacy calls for evidence-based teaching principles such as:

  • Systematic and cumulative instruction.
  • Explicit instruction that includes multisensory teaching.
  • diagnostic element so teachers can use evidence from formal and informal assessments to make adjustments in the classroom.

Amplify CKLA not only includes all of these elements, it was built on them.

In Grades K–2, the program uses a unique two-strand instructional approach to target knowledge and skills. The scope and sequence intentionally builds foundational skills by:

  • Beginning with critical phonological awareness and phonemic awareness instruction before moving into letter-sound knowledge and basic and advanced decoding and encoding.
  • Giving students opportunities to practice decoding and word recognition skills both in isolation and in connected text using 100% decodable readers.
  • Ensuring new skills are taught explicitly, practiced and reviewed regularly, and assessed frequently with checks for understanding, formative assessments, and formal assessments, including diagnostic/placement assessments and benchmark assessments.

For students who need more help with decoding and encoding words Amplify CKLA provides activities and materials for targeted reinforcement and intervention by way of two online resources:

  • Assessment and Remediation Guides for K-3
  • Intervention Toolkit

Contact us

Have a question about the program? Your Account Executive, Tommy Gearhart, is happy to help.

Tommy Gearhart
Senior Account Executive
505-206-7661
tgearhart@amplify.com

Program details

Get started with Amplify Reading: 6–8 Edition.

Cuatro personajes con distintos disfraces y una gran máquina robótica con garras visibles se encuentran juntos sobre un fondo blanco.

Introduction

Amplify Reading 6–8 is a digital reading program laser-focused on helping students find deeper meaning in texts by teaching them to question everything they read.

To capture students’ imagination, Amplify Reading 6–8 takes the form of an interactive graphic novel called The Last Readers. This story is set in a dystopian future world run by Machines, where people are told what to read and what to think. But dissent is afoot. Recruited for the rebellion, students are trained in the powerful ways authors convey meaning and affect their audience.

What students learn

Exploring texts from literary classics to propaganda, from great speeches to scientific articles, students learn to analyze the moves that authors make to achieve their purposes. Chapter topics alternate between the close analysis of arguments and literary analysis.

Each chapter should take approximately one hour for students to complete.

How to integrate this program into your curriculum

Amplify Reading 6–8 is designed for students to work independently as they progress through the chapters of The Last Readers. For the last chapter of each book, teachers have the option to build on independent work through group and whole-class activities.

For the best experience, students should complete the chapters in order. The chapters and concepts build on each other and were designed to help students master close reading skills. While teachers can unlock chapters so students can work on specific concepts at any given moment, doing so may result in a less-than-ideal experience. Later lessons are locked by default, but we will provide the ability to unlock lessons from within the teacher dashboard.

How teachers are using Amplify Reading 6–8

Reinforcement of concepts

Many teachers find the program extremely helpful for reinforcing key reading skills in the core curriculum. They use it in class one or two times a week for 20 to 30 minutes over the course of a year.

Test preparation

The program features extensive practice with text-dependent questions, providing a fun and effective way for students to get comfortable answering those kinds of questions.

Other common uses

Teachers also use the program to introduce key close reading concepts, for extra practice or homework, as response to intervention, and for after-school and summer school programs.

Routines

  • Devoting one class period every week or two to having students work independently on The Last Readers. While students are working independently on devices, teachers can work with small groups who need extra support with their core curriculum work. Teachers can also assign students work in Practice Mode during class or for homework.
  • Treating each book of The Last Readers as a 2–3 week mini-unit that can be inserted between units of core curriculum instruction. In addition to having students work on the chapters during class, teachers can assign students work in Practice Mode in between chapters or for homework.
  • Regularly assigning The Last Readers to students as homework. Because students may move through the chapters at different paces, teachers may want to assign one chapter per week and ask students to work in Practice Mode for the rest of the week after they complete a chapter.

Pedagogical approach

In Amplify Reading 6–8:

  1. Students learn to question everything they read by engaging with a story-based adventure in which understanding every piece of text and every article, billboard, speech and poem is essential to the narrative.
  2. Students learn to leverage the same devices used by authors to convey meaning by creating new content that integrates seamlessly with the story.

Unlike other reading supplementals that rely solely on assessment questions and feedback, Amplify Reading 6–8 weaves digital instruction together with assessment, all within an immersive story where the analysis of text is a critical element of the plot. The storytelling is vivid, suspenseful, and complex, designed to provide students with purpose and agency as they take on ever more challenging and high-stakes close reading tasks.

Each mission includes three steps:

  1. Interactive instruction: Students engage with a specific close reading concept using digital manipulatives.
  2. Guided close reading: Students apply knowledge of the concept to a complex text.
  3. Creative application: Students use their knowledge of the concept to create new content that solves a story-based problem.

Literary and informational passages are paired with carefully crafted, text-dependent questions and technology-enhanced items that prepare students for the same types of questions they’ll face on high stakes assessments. All along the way, teachers receive reports that visualize activity and progress, and highlight areas of improvement. Teachers can also leverage the original content generated by students in each mission as a rich classroom discussion piece.

Combining content and pedagogy with the creativity and purpose of storytelling results in an experience that truly motivates students and gives them the skills and confidence to tackle complex text.

Standards and alignments

Download the complete scope and sequence.

The practice of close reading lies at the heart of the Common Core and many other state standards for English Language Arts. Instruction in close reading enables students to become attuned to the essential elements of authentic texts: from key ideas and claims to specific details and evidence; from the effects of single words to those of larger textual structures; from the significance of individual texts to the interrelated meanings of entire corpora.

The recent focus on close reading is reflected in the text-dependent questions that populate many recent state assessments of ELA proficiency. Text-dependent questions address students’:

  • understanding of vocabulary
  • understanding of syntax and structure
  • understanding of literary and argumentative devices
  • understanding of themes and central ideas

Amplify Reading 6–8 gives students the essential skills and confidence they need to address text-dependent questions and the standards to which they refer.

Additionally, each book of The Last Readers emphasizes at least one Common Core reading anchor standards associated with each of the ELA standards strands:

Book 1: KID 1 / C&S 4 / IKI 8

Book 2: KID 1, 2, 3 / C&S 4, 5, 6 / IKI 8

Book 3: KID 1, 2, 3 / C&S 4, 5, 6 / IKI 6, 7, 8

Levels

Because each classroom represents a wide range of reading abilities, teachers can assign students to unique learning tracks that are tailored to provide the level of support each student needs.

After your students have enrolled in a class, you can assign them to a particular level in Reporting. All students will be automatically enrolled in the Core level. It is recommended that you assign all students to whatever level is most appropriate for them before they begin chapter 1. You can change a student’s level at any time.

LEVELDESIGNED FOR

CORE

Students whose reading levels fall within the middle school band.

EXTRA SUPPORT

Students who are reading below middle school level or with limited English proficiency. The instructional content and texts have been adapted or replaced to support students who “can engage in complex, cognitively demanding social and academic activities requiring language when provided moderate linguistic support.” Support includes streamlined, scaffolded content that integrates the built-in-dictionary tool, so students can access content and academic vocabulary at their language level and above. For productive written activities, students are given supports such as sentence frames to help them develop structured academic responses.


ADVANCED (coming soon)

We are developing an advanced level that will challenge readers with more complex texts and prompts, and with additional content.

Included texts

Book 1

Book 2

Book 3

The 5 patterns we found in schools with improved reading

After a decade of tracking students’ pathways in early reading, we’ve been able to identify the schools getting outsized results—so we called them to ask what they’re doing! And so far, we’ve identified five consistent patterns.

1. Start early.

Schools that deliver the strongest results work hard to get kids on track — and often ahead — in kindergarten. Why? Those who get through the decoding stage by age eight begin building vocabulary and background knowledge through reading itself. These schools reason that it’s easier to get students ahead from the start than to try to catch them up later.

2. Surround kids with books.

Reading at the right level improves decoding, vocabulary, knowledge, and stamina. In a recent study, 11 students who read an extra seven minutes per day in class had substantially higher reading rates than other students. Those minutes add up to 160,020 additional words read each school year, and reading volume is important in building knowledge—even more so than cognitive ability.

3. Measure.

All schools collect data; the best ones think of it as measurement. For instance, they measure whether an intervention is having the expected impact. If not, they introduce new, temporary measures for attendance, perhaps, or fidelity of implementation. They are constantly tinkering and learning. They describe themselves as never satisfied.

4. Create a support team.

One of the most effective practices we found is ensuring that students get extra support when they need it. Classroom teachers can have a hard time reaching everyone, even with the best intentions. A cross-classroom team can base its decisions on careful data analysis and do whatever it takes to ensure extra resources are found and allocated where they’re needed most.

5. Beat summer.

Summer is brutal. Students often lose as much as half of their hard-won gains from the school year over the summer weeks, and the loss is especially steep for students from lower-income households. But even a few minutes a week of reminder exercises can reverse these losses, just as using a muscle prevents atrophy.

Reading at a college-entry level is a virtuoso performance. Even reading on level by third grade requires a constellation of successes — from mastering the sound-spelling patterns of English, to the painstaking accumulation of vocabulary and knowledge necessary to make sense of sentences. The simple verb to read hardly feels adequate to describe what students are doing when they make sense of the text. Ensuring the effortless enjoyment of reading for all is one of the great social undertakings of our time. We’re so happy to be working toward this noble goal with you.

Meet Amplifying Your District Award Winner Brittney Bills

Brittney’s passion for reading development shines through her commitment to early literacy. Under a four-year plan she devised, Brittney’s district adopted a new curriculum and system of professional development that embraced the Science of Reading and celebrated its impact on their students.

What does the Science of Reading mean to you?

I believe the Science of Reading is about hope. Knowing 95% of students are cognitively able to read at grade level with the right explicit instruction was empowering for me and the teachers I support. Every child should know the joy and success of reading.

What tools/curriculum do you use to implement the Science of Reading? How did Amplify help?

We are an Amplify district and super proud to be an Amplify district. Last year, we started with Amplify CKLA Skills adoption because that’s where we had the biggest gap in terms of our instructional resources and supporting our students. Then we added on Knowledge for K–2 this year, integrated it for grades 3–5, and started using Amplify Reading.

We started using mCLASS® with DIBELS® 8th Edition with all of our K–3 students. After last year, fourth- and fifth-grade teachers caught wind of these awesome things that the lower elementary teachers had access to that they didn’t, so we expanded mCLASS with DIBELS 8th Edition to K–5 this year. We love the high-quality resources and programs that Amplify has to offer and we have seen some tremendous results early on and had some wonderful success. They’re supporting us in our vision, which is wonderful.

What advice do you have for teachers starting with the Science of Reading?

Just get started. Don’t feel overwhelmed by what you don’t know. We have seen tremendous success and tremendous results, but there’s still a lot of work left for us to do. I would say decide the thing that you want to focus on, pick something that you want to understand better, that you want to learn more about, and commit yourself. In the education world, we are almost paralyzed by the sheer amount of things that need to be done. There’s this sense of immediacy and urgency, that you have to balance with your reality.

Make sure that teachers feel supported because teachers go through a grieving process once they learn more. They feel guilt and sadness about some of the students they have taught in the past. Stay committed to growing and developing because science is going to change and you have to evolve and move with the science.

Watch the Science of Reading Star Awards!

The Science of Reading Star Awards are back!

If you’re reading this, someone taught you to read! You might remember learning your letters with a standout teacher, or simply curling up with a loved one to point out pictures and sound out words.

No matter who stands out to you, it takes a constellation of people to help children learn to read—both inside classrooms and beyond, and from district leadership to student families.

It also takes science: specifically, the science of teaching reading.

And we want to celebrate Science of Reading stars!

That’s why we created the Science of Reading Star Awards. Read on for more information about them, including how to nominate someone for the  2023 Awards. (If you’re already ready to nominate a star in your community, go right ahead!)

Reading educator awards for teachers who shine.

We launched this awards program in 2021—a year when schools, educators, and students were still working to bounce back from pandemic challenges and into a new normal. Even then, educators drove change, leading their school communities on a journey to the Science of Reading.

Our inaugural award program honored educators who championed and advocated for the Science of Reading in their classrooms, schools, or districts.

They generated buy-in. They inspired their peers and students. They successfully brought research-based instruction, phonics instruction, and foundational literacy skills into their approaches—and had remarkable gains to show for it.

Our 2021 awards, both finalists and winners, celebrated:

  • Teachers who directly impacted their students and served as role models for their colleagues by applying the Science of Reading.

Winner: Anila Nayak, instructional coach and reading intervention teacher, Los Angeles Unified School District, California.

She says: “The Science of Reading is becoming my North Star because it’s guiding me to give the best that research has shown for my students.”

  • Principals who have supervised the successful shift to the Science of Reading in many classrooms across several grades.

Winner: Cathy Dorbish, principal, Austintown Elementary School, Ohio

She says: “We know our kids come from all different backgrounds, different opportunities, and parents who read or don’t. By teaching them in this manner, we’re leveling the playing field. Those kids who may be economically disadvantaged, [but] they’re going to be readers just like the kids whose parents bought them 100,000 books.”

  • District leaders who have driven or are driving change using the Science of Reading.

Winner: Alli Rice, elementary ELA lead, Kansas City, Kansas Public Schools

She says: “Teachers are saying things like ‘I never really thought my kids could have a discussion about the Renaissance during language arts class, but they are doing it.’”

Winner: Brittney Bills, curriculum coordinator, Grand Island Public Schools, Nebraska

She says: “I believe the Science of Reading is about hope. Knowing 95% of students are cognitively able to read at grade level with the right explicit instruction was empowering for me and the teachers I support.”

Nominate a Science of Reading star!

Inspired? Now think of the educators in your world—especially those devoted to literacy. Do you know someone who has transformed their classroom and empowered their students with the Science of Reading? What about someone who’s gone above and beyond core instruction based in the Science of Reading to apply these evidence-based practices in less traditional ways in areas like assessment, intervention, biliteracy, and beyond? (And yes, this person might be you!) We also have new categories this year, to honor both the traditional, and less traditional, Science of Reading champions!

Submit your nomination for the 2023 Science of Reading Star Awards by February 28!

All award winners will receive:

  • A free professional development session with Susan Lambert, host of Science of Reading: The Podcast.
  • A library of Science of Reading books to guide their journey.
  • A subscription to The Reading League Journal.
  • A spotlight on an episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast.

The Grand Prize winner will receive full conference registration and associated travel costs to Big Sky Literacy Summit in Big Sky, Montana, Sept. 2023 (dates forthcoming).

Learn more

To hear more from the 2021 winners, you can watch our Amplify Science of Reading Star Award Winners panel, now available as an on-demand webinar, or tune into Science of Reading: The Podcast to hear their conversations with host Susan Lambert.

Their stories and perspectives may help you discover how you can drive change in your classroom, school, and district with the Science of Reading!

Found in translation–the power of cross-linguistic transfer

¿Verdadero o falso? You must be bilingual to support emergent bilingual students in their literacy development.

¡Falso!

An essential component of supporting emergent bilinguals in developing literacy is understanding cross-linguistic transfer (CLT): when emergent bilinguals use knowledge of one language to support learning another.

Educators do not need to be fluent in both languages to identify—and teach—which elements of one transfer to the other.

“Teachers should not feel discouraged in supporting their students who are Spanish-speaking, because there are ways that they can still support cross-linguistic transfer without actually speaking the language,” says Amplify senior PD strategist in biliteracy Lauren Birner.

But CLT doesn’t just happen—it requires explicit instruction. So we do need to ensure that this takes place if we want to support equity in education, especially in early childhood education.

How can educators bring the power of CLT into instruction? And support equity and excellence in education?

Making connections: The impact of CLT

Our recent webinar Making Connections: The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Transfer in Biliteracy Instruction—led by Lauren Birner and Amplify’s Kajal Patel Below—explored answers to these questions.

In the webinar, Birner and Patel Below describe similarities and differences between English and Spanish, discuss how those similarities and differences can impact instruction, and explain why CLT helps English learners leverage skills from both languages to build their biliteracy.

They also underscore why it matters—namely, that it’s about supporting equity in early childhood education and beyond.

More than 15% of our K–3 students in this country are emergent bilinguals, and we have a responsibility to help them cultivate and expand that superpower.

—Kajal Patel

The Simple View of Reading and biliteracy

The idea behind the Simple View of Reading is that the combination of language comprehension and word recognition is what leads students to gain meaning from text. If either language comprehension skills or word recognition skills are lacking, students cannot become skilled readers, and this is true in both English and Spanish.

“Research shows that when teachers explicitly teach students what transfers from one language to the other,” says Patel Below, “students are able to devote more cognitive processing time toward the more complex orthography and morphology systems of English that require more time than the more transparent systems of Spanish.”

Birner had this to add: “While components of these domains might overlap, it can be helpful to think of them individually, and how they’ll impact language and literacy development.”

So let’s take a look at the areas of language where we can leverage cross-linguistic transfer.

  1. Phonetics and phonology: 92% of all of the sounds in English and Spanish have a direct correlation. That means that teachers can focus explicit instruction only on the remaining 8% of sounds—such as the rolled in Spanish. Meanwhile, we can also encourage them to be language detectives and recognize where the languages do connect and how they can use their skills in one to understand the other. That approach, says Birner, “will not only save valuable time and energy, but it’ll also help [educators] recognize bilingualism as an asset for all of our students.”
  2. Morphology: Students can explore cognates like hospital/hospital and celebration/celebración, while also exploring similarities and differences in pronunciation. “Whether or not they are Spanish-speaking, teachers can look to cross-linguistic transfer guidance and start to recognize things, the prefixes and suffixes that are similar across the two languages,” says Birner.
  3. Syntax and grammar: Spanish and English do have rules and structures that differ from each other, in the areas of word order, gender, conjugation, and possession. As students progress in learning these distinctions, teachers can seize opportunities for explicit instruction. For example, let’s say a student constructs the sentence: “The flower of Ana is pretty.” This is not an error, but an approximation “to be celebrated.” Birner says. “It’s a comprehensible sentence in English that just needs a minor adjustment. We can use this type of sentence as an opportunity to provide explicit instruction on possessives.”
  4. Semantics: Semantics is the study of word meaning and is critical for language learners. Exploring idioms, homonyms and homophones, and other nuances of usage across language can give students the chance to build from similarities and identify differences. “You might do something like hang a chart of idiomatic phrases in each language,” says Birner. “Looking at both languages side by side is a really great way to support your students in learning a second language.”
  5. Pragmatics: Pragmatics encompass the ways people communicate that are nuanced or unsaid. They’re often rooted in cultural norms, which include both physical norms (looking someone in the eye when speaking) and social norms (using euphemisms). “Providing students with explicit instruction on how communicating may differ from culture to culture and situation to situation can help avoid misunderstandings,” says Birner. “It’s also a great way to allow students to see the world in perspective.”

More to explore

Amplify’s biliteracy programs, rooted in the Science of Reading, can help all educators engage with multilingual learners and make the most of cross-linguistic transfer and dual language education. Here are some additional resources for you:

Biliteracy principles, as shared by biliteracy experts (students!)

Our biliteracy video playlist

”The Importance of Dual Language Assessment in Early Literacy” (white paper)

The Importance of Dual Language Assessment in Early Literacy (infographic)

Principles of Biliteracy + the Science of Reading

The Science of Reading

National Reading Month: Making reading in elementary schools fun

Happy National Reading Month!

Of course, every month is reading month—and every day is reading day!

But March makes National Reading Month official, and we’d like to help you celebrate.

  • Brain Builders” is an animated video series you can share with your students to help them understand what the brain does in order to read—placing reading science in the hands (and brains!) of students.

Your kids will join Minh on his journey as his babysitter, Tamara, helps him cultivate a love for reading—while also learning a bit of cognitive science. The series includes 13 episodes that you won’t want to miss!

  • Reading Buddies” makes learning to read fun (with the help of a talking dog, of course). Created by a pair of performers during the COVID-19 quarantine, the show became a smash hit when The Reading League came on to help it grow.

The series is based on the Science of Reading—but that’s not why students like it! They get to follow and practice along with Dusty the Dog as his person, Dott, teaches him to read. All the while, the kids are learning the underlying components of skillful word reading such as phonological awareness, letter names/sounds, and blending sounds.

And for a little good old-fashioned coloring, we’ve also created this literary reference sheet for your students to bring alive with their own imaginations.

We hope you enjoy celebrating your kids’ brains and creativity!

More to read and learn

From Amplify’s Science of Reading: The Podcast:

Find out how “Reading Buddies” came to be (and managed to outpace “Sesame Street”)!

Meet Margaret Goldberg, co-founder of The Right to Read Project, to get her take on Brain Builders and the importance of the comprehension strand of the Science of Reading.

Request a free sample of CKLA.

Embracing artificial intelligence in the math classroom

Artificial intelligence seems to be everywhere these days. We use it when we ask Alexa or Siri for the morning weather report. We use it when GPS tells us how to best avoid traffic. We use it when we chill at the end of the day with a recommendation from Netflix. 

But what about during the day—and specifically, at school? Even more specifically, can AI be leveraged to enhance the math classroom? 

“While AI is an amazing tool, you’ve really got to make sure that you are focusing in on your expertise as well,” says veteran math educator and STEM instructional coach Kristen Moore, “And saying, ‘How can I use this to make something better?’ and not just, ‘How can I use this to make something?’” 

In this post, we’ll talk about the current state of AI in math education, and how it can support educators in making math better. (SPOILER: It’s not going to replace you!) 

First, some STEM learning for us: What is artificial intelligence? 

Artificial intelligence, or AI, refers to the development of computer systems able to perform tasks that typically require human intelligence. 

It involves creating algorithms and systems that enable computers to learn from data, adapt to new situations, and make decisions or predictions.

AI aims to mimic human cognitive functions such as understanding language, recognizing patterns, solving problems, and making decisions. It encompasses a range of techniques and technologies, including machine learning, neural networks, natural language processing, and robotics.

The term “artificial intelligence” was introduced in 1956.  The availability of vast amounts of data and advancements in computer power in the 2010s led to additional breakthroughs. And with the proliferation of smartphones, smart devices, and the internet, AI technologies began to work their way into our homes, cars, pockets, and everyday lives.

What’s the state of AI in education? 

AI is already commonplace in schools and classrooms. Here are just a few examples:

  • Adaptive learning: This software uses AI algorithms to adjust the difficulty and content of lessons based on a student’s performance, helping students remain engaged and challenged at their optimal level.
  • Assistive technologies: AI helps students with disabilities by providing assistive technologies like text-to-speech and speech-to-text tools, making educational content more accessible.
  • Plagiarism detection: These tools use AI algorithms to identify instances of copied or unoriginal content in students’ assignments, essays, and projects. 
  • Data analysis for teachers: AI analyzes data from student assessments to identify trends and insights, helping teachers make informed decisions about instructional strategies. It can also predict students’ performance trends, helping teachers identify at-risk students early and intervene to provide additional support.
  • Grammar, spelling, and style checkers: AI can provide real-time feedback to students (and teachers!) on their writing work.

Embracing AI technology in your math classroom

While AI is not here to replace teachers, it is here to stay. And experts say it’s only going to become more commonplace. But despite how common AI is already—both outside and inside school—not all teachers are familiar with its numerous applications and potential. Now is a great time for educators to start exploring its uses and get ahead of the curve.

Here are a few easy entry points for math teachers. 

ChatGPT: A common AI tool, ChatGPT is designed to understand and generate human-like text based on the input it receives. It’s trained on a wide range of internet text, which enables it to generate responses to a vast array of prompts and questions. 

Most students have likely experimented with ChatGPT, while teachers—though aware of it—are less likely to use it. ChatGPT has highly practical applications for both groups, though—including in the math (and science) classroom. 

It can, for example, help teachers plan interesting, relevant math lessons for their students. Kristen Moore, who discusses this topic on Math Teacher Lounge, suggests that math teachers use ChatGPT to:

  • Connect topics to student interests and vice-versa. (Teachers can ask ChatGPT for real-life applications of polynomials and select those that might pique student interest, or ask about math applications derived from students’ hobbies and pursuits.) 
  • Generate word problems (including step-by-step solutions), lessons, projects and rubrics, and more.

Toward the (near) future

As AI advances, it will continue to revolutionize education. Here are a few time-saving ways that educators can look forward to using it in their classrooms.

  • AI tutors: AI-powered virtual tutors will help math students with homework questions and provide explanations for various concepts. These tutors can be available at home 24/7, allowing students to seek an AI homework helper whenever they need it.
  • Automatic graders: Some AI tools can automatically grade math work, including multiple-choice and short-answer assignments. These tutors can be available at home 24/7 in any household with internet access, allowing students to seek more personalized instruction.
  • Personalized learning paths: These AI-powered platforms will work particularly well for math students by adapting to each student’s skill level and pace, offering tailored exercises and challenges that cater to their strengths and identify areas of improvement. They will analyze students’ performance and adjust the difficulty of content, ensuring that students get targeted support and opportunities to progress.

More to explore

To dive deeper into AI in math education—and get rolling with AI in your classroom—check out this two-episode mini-series on our Math Teacher Lounge podcast focused on just that: 

“I’m a believer that learning is inherently social,” says Carolan, who is quick to emphasize how technology can enhance that quality, not replace it. The same can be said for the role teachers play in the classroom—a role technology can support, but never take away. To learn more about this topic (and discuss it with your fellow educators!), head to our Math Teacher Lounge community

Connecting science and literacy: The power of language

We’ve talked about how scientists need literacy skills in order to be scientists. They can’t do their jobs without reading, writing, listening, and communicating.

Our recent webinar Science Connections: Science and Literacy explored this intersection from a broader level: the power of language in the science classroom.

How can science teachers remove language barriers to make sure all students are able to access prior knowledge—and acquire more? And how can teachers leverage language to create optimal learning conditions for their science students? Why should they?

Let’s find out what webinar co-hosts Eric Cross and Susan Gomez Zwiep, Ph.D., had to say!

Language and science sense-making

Contrary to stereotype, scientists aren’t just loners in labs. Susan Gomez Zwiep, former middle school science teacher and senior science educator at BSCS Science Learning, credits a colleague with this pearl: “If I’m just doing science myself, and not talking to anybody, that’s not science. That’s just me in my head.”

So science teachers need to give students every possible opportunity to get out of their heads. And if language is a barrier—whether students are learning English, or challenged by science vocab—teachers can help remove it.

This principle is especially important in the context of phenomena-based learning, says Gomez Zwiep. “Rather than telling students ideas, and then proving those ideas correct by showing them a phenomenon, we show them the phenomena and engage them in science sense-making to develop that understanding,” she says. “Language is central to science sense-making and communicating that sense-making.”

Students also bring their prior knowledge to scientific sense-making. And, as Gomez Zwiep points out, prior knowledge is often embedded in the language a student uses at home, or just their own non-scientific vernacular. “I have to use that when I first engage with the phenomenon,” she says. “Otherwise, I’m limiting the resources that kids bring to the learning environment.”

Language in a “safe” science classroom

“If I had to learn science in my second language, I would be struggling with not only everyday vocabulary, but also content-specific vocabulary,” says Eric Cross, host of Amplify’s Science Connections podcast. “You would never actually know what I knew or what I was bringing to the table.”

The goal is to create an environment where students feel comfortable exploring, using whatever language is accessible to them, and then guiding them to conclusions—and precise scientific language. “A classroom requires trust. It requires relationship building,” says Gomez Zwiep. “If a student is worried about saying something a particular way, that’s where all their cognitive energy is going instead of actually talking about the science.”

The key? Put scientific ideas first, and the language will come. “We used to wait until kids had English in order to learn science. And now we’re starting to see that language emerges from learning experiences,” says Gomez Zwiep. “So it’s a product of learning, not a prerequisite.”

Literacy in your science classroom

You can integrate science and literacy right away, starting with free science and literacy lesson samples from Amplify Science.

Explore more:

Amplify Science

Science blogs

Science Connections podcast episodes

5 ways to boost biliteracy with the Science of Reading

Research shows that bilingual instruction (including dual language instruction and dual language immersion) supports the long-term success of dual language learners—in both languages, and beyond.

How do we best support those students?

More precisely, how are we serving our emergent bilingual students so that they can develop their biliteracy? This is a question posed by biliteracy expert and Amplify product specialist Alestra Flores Menéndez. And in our recent webinar Leveraging the Science of Reading to Boost Biliteracy, she and other experts attempt to answer it.

The power of biliteracy

Knowing more than one language is a powerful tool for opening up new worlds, meeting different people—or even just asking directions in an unfamiliar place.

But that’s not all. Bilingualism itself is a cognitive strength. Research conducted in 2015 by Claude Goldenberg and Kirstin Wagner links bilingualism to increased control over attention, improved working memory, greater awareness of the structure and form of language, and better abstract and symbolic representation skills.

“Our multilingual learners really are using their brains differently,” says Flores Menéndez.

And as with all students, we need to start early to make sure they’ve got their best shot at literacy.

The number of emerging bilingual students in our classrooms is growing, with 15.5% of them in grades K–3. That group includes the key developmental year—third grade.

Third grade is seen as the last year students learn to read before they start reading to learn. Without proficiency by fourth grade, they’re at risk of struggle across subjects.

And for many students, literacy is biliteracy. So how to make sure they get there?

Helping all multilingual learners succeed

“Bilingual instruction has been proven to be the most effective,” says Amplify biliteracy specialist Ana Torres, M.Ed., citing research by Virginia Thomas and Wayne Collier.

Other models (English immersion, transitional bilingual) are a fit for students with certain language profiles. As Torres notes, “We have to be intentional and purposeful to make sure there are positive outcomes for all students.”

But the proven impact of the bilingual model shows this: Knowledge of, and in, a second language builds from the first.

Foundational skills, vocabulary, and knowledge are essential, and all transfer to the second language—through explicit, research-based instruction.

Key elements of that instruction:

  1. Assessing literacy in both languages. “Assessing what [students] know in their native language is crucial to their success in acquiring that second language,” says Torres. A 2019 study at the University of Oregon looked at phonological awareness among Spanish-speaking pre-K students. (Phonological awareness represents the understanding that words are made up of a series of discrete sounds.) When assessed in English, 63% of students needed Tier 2 or 3 intervention. But when assessed in Spanish, only 21% did. “We need to look at the overall picture of students’ literacy,” Torres says. “Otherwise they’re going to get the wrong instruction.”
  2. Deliberately bridging from the native language to the new one. Spanish and English share many elements, among them letter sounds. If students know the sounds of the letter m in Spanish, they’ll be able to map that sound onto the same letter in English.
  3. Grounding in the Science of Reading. The Simple View of Reading has been validated in more than 150 studies across multiple languages. Foundational skills, vocabulary, and knowledge can all transfer through explicit instruction.
  4. Honoring students’ home languages, cultures, and community experiences. “It’s well documented that when children feel a sense of belonging, they’re more motivated to learn and experience more success in school,” says Menéndez. “Students should see themselves reflected positively in any curricular material.”
  5. Emphasizing knowledge. Perhaps you’re familiar with the iconic baseball study. Students with prior knowledge of baseball greatly outperformed their peers on reading comprehension—even those peers who were stronger readers. “Building knowledge is absolutely essential for literacy development,” says Menéndez.

Learn more

Explore Amplify Caminos.

Watch the full webinar: Leveraging the Science of Reading to Boost Biliteracy.

Biliteracy and Science of Reading principles in English and Spanish.

Read about The Importance of Dual Language Assessment in Early Literacy.

Binge our biliteracy podcast playlist.

The Science of Reading and middle school: A perfect match

Perhaps you’re familiar with the Science of Reading—the large (and still-growing) body of research that details how children learn to read and informs instructional best practices to get them there.

And perhaps you also know how important it is to provide kids with evidence-based practices for reading instruction—and how, as the most effective way to make sure that every kid can learn to read, it’s truly crucial in setting all students up for success.

But did you know that the Science of Reading is not just about building foundational skills like phonological and phonemic awareness? It’s not just about how the littlest kids learn to recognize letters and words on a page. The need for research-informed instruction doesn’t go away once kids make the initial shift from not reading to reading. In fact, it’s essential throughout their reading journey—from the earliest years through grade school, and most certainly in the middle school classroom.

Let’s explore why middle schoolers need research-based literacy instruction, and take a look at how teachers can deliver it.

The Science of Reading and middle school literacy

Our brains are wired to learn spoken language, but they are not automatically wired for reading. They don’t just know that certain marks on a page are designed to represent sounds or meanings. That’s why—as the Science of Reading confirms—we have to teach reading explicitly and systematically. Learning to read actually rewires the brain by creating new neural connections and enhancing existing ones.

And when it comes to brain development, middle school is a big moment. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for higher-order thinking and executive function, is still maturing. It’s flexible, adaptable, and perfectly situated to receive the explicit instruction provided by research-based reading instruction.

Students in middle school have typically reached a certain level of automaticity with encoding and decoding. They’ve got the full—and finite—set of phonics skills under their belt, and they’re able to apply them across new and different contexts, even as vocabulary becomes more complex and unfamiliar.

But although this decoding practice remains important, students in middle school are typically able to shift more cognitive energy toward language comprehension.

And we know that background knowledge is crucial for language comprehension—the more prior knowledge you bring to a text, the better you understand it. That’s why middle school presents a major opportunity to deliver strategic and specific instruction in both language comprehension and background knowledge.

Leveraging the power of the Science of Reading

How might you take advantage of this unique developmental moment to accelerate student literacy? Here’s a glimpse at some of the approaches Amplify Chief Academic Officer and Vice President of ELA Deb Sabin explores in this webinar:

  • Choose complex grade-level texts that help build students’ background knowledge and expose them to a variety of structures and genres. Exposure and access to grade-appropriate content is crucial for every student and helps them stay on target towards reading goals.
  • Provide explicit comprehension instruction to help students interpret texts and build mental models for understanding. You might employ graphic organizers or encourage performance for deeper understanding and engagement.
  • Incorporate writing prompts into core instruction. More and more research shows that writing has a strong impact on comprehension, helping students crystallize their understanding while also exposing gaps.
  • Focus on fluency. Research connects oral reading practice to improved comprehension. You might have students practice reading specific passages aloud, encouraging them not only to work on rate and accuracy, but also to reflect on which words they choose to emphasize and why.

That’s just a peek at how you can bring the power of research-based reading instruction to your middle schoolers. To learn more, check out the following resources:

Understanding dyslexia and the power of early intervention

What do Albert Einstein, Whoopi Goldberg, and Percy Jackson have in common? 

A diagnosis (albeit retroactive or speculative) of dyslexia. 

Fortunately, our understanding of the condition has progressed since the days of Einstein—and it’s also more accurate than it’s portrayed in The Olympians. (Percy’s challenges in that beloved series are said to result from his brain being “hard-wired” for ancient Greek, which is…not really a thing.) 

So what do we know now? “You can screen early, and you can intervene just as early,” says Emily Lutrick, a preK–5 curriculum and dyslexia coordinator with almost 20 years of experience in education (and a guest on Science of Reading: The Podcast). 

Let’s take a look at more of what we know about what dyslexia is (and is not), what students with these challenges struggle with, and the importance—and power—of early intervention.

What is dyslexia?

Dyslexia is a neurological condition that affects the way a person’s brain processes written and spoken language—and thus their ability to read, write, and spell. It shows up as difficulties in accurate and fluent word recognition, spelling, and decoding. 

More precisely, people with dyslexia often experience challenges in phonological awareness. They may struggle to break down words into their component sounds and to recognize the relationships between letters and sounds. These difficulties can make reading and writing laborious, and can—understandably—bring down a student’s performance and confidence. It’s a lifelong condition that requires (and responds to) specific research-based interventions.

In the United States, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) estimates that about 15–20% of the population has symptoms indicating a risk of dyslexia or reading difficulty. The condition occurs across different cultures, languages, generations, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

Common misconceptions about dyslexia

Dyslexia is not a result of laziness, poor teaching, or lack of effort (or of being a demi-god).

Let’s debunk some other misconceptions

  • Dyslexia is not a visual problem that causes readers to mix up letters like “b” and “d.” People with dyslexia struggle to match letters to sounds. (Confusing letters is actually common—lots of kids do it, and then move past it, as they learn to read.)
  • We don’t have to wait for students to “fail” in order to identify signs of dyslexia. Some clues and signs may emerge even before students start school, such as a delay in learning tasks like tying shoes and telling time, or difficulties with self-expression; following directions; or learning the alphabet, rhymes, or times tables.
  • Students with dyslexia do not just need more time to learn to read. Dyslexia is not something outgrown. Students who are at risk of developing dyslexia need consistent, high-quality, research-based instruction. 
  • People with dyslexia are slower / not as smart. On the contrary, people with dyslexia are able to think as quickly and creatively as others, and are just as intelligent.
  • Students with dyslexia need to use different materials than everyone else. Students with dyslexia can actually succeed using the same texts and curricula as their peers!
  • Students with dyslexia do have the potential to read at grade level when they have access to early intervention, targeted supports, and a flexible curriculum. In fact, a study at the University of Washington showed that only eight weeks of specialized instruction strengthened neural circuitry—and improved reading performance.

Types of dyslexia

Dyslexia is also not a one-size-fits-all condition. Some common types include:

  • Phonological dyslexia: This type of dyslexia primarily affects a person’s ability to decode words and recognize the sounds associated with letters and letter combinations.
  • Surface dyslexia: Students with surface dyslexia may struggle with irregular words that do not follow common phonetic rules but be able to read more regular words accurately.
  • Rapid naming deficit: This type of dyslexia is characterized by difficulty in rapidly naming familiar objects, colors, or symbols.
  • Double deficit dyslexia: Individuals with double deficit dyslexia exhibit both phonological and rapid naming deficits.

The importance of early intervention

Early intervention is key to helping students with dyslexia reach their full potential. Research has shown that identifying and addressing the condition in the earliest possible stages of education can significantly improve student reading and writing abilities—and so much more.

Early intervention generally focuses on building foundational skills such as phonemic awareness, phonics, decoding, and reading fluency. It might include specialized instruction, assistive technology, and modifications to classroom materials and assessments. 

Intervention has an emotional and social impact, too. Dyslexia can bring down a student’s confidence and even keep them on the social sidelines. By identifying and addressing dyslexia early, teachers can provide their students with access to emotional support and opportunities to catch and keep up with their peers, which helps them remain part of the classroom community. 

Screening for dyslexia

Before intervention comes identification. That’s why mCLASS® includes built-in dyslexia screening, with reliable tools such as: 

  • Phonological Awareness Assessment: Assesses a student’s ability to recognize and manipulate sounds in words.
  • Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) Test: Evaluates how quickly a student can name. 

And before all that, it’s important that teachers be the first eyes and ears. They may ask caregivers about any family history of reading difficulties, as the condition often has a genetic component. Lutrick watches for students who might be struggling to read fluently or think meta-cognitively about text. ”You know that they’ve got the ability but something is just blocking them,” she says

One diagnostic tack she takes: Asking them to try to decode nonsense words. “For a child who is struggling and at risk of reading difficulty, every word may be a nonsense word,” she says. “Do they have the skills necessary to break it down? If not, I would like to try to help them fill those gaps as quickly as I can.” (mCLASS also includes a Nonsense Word Fluency assessment.)

And it’s possible to intervene even before that, as podcast host Susan Lambert notes: “If we are not already doing systematic and explicit phonics in kindergarten and first grade, there is a possibility that we wouldn’t identify those kids.” 

Lutrick also points out that dyslexia can be disguised in many different ways. “Look at every student and see if there is something behind the mask,” she says. “We need to task ourselves to really look at every individual student as if each one of them is critically important, which we all believe, or we wouldn’t be in this profession.”

More to explore

S3-05: Thinking is power

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

Join us as we sit down with Melanie Trecek-King, college professor and creator of Thinking is Power, to explore how much of an asset science can truly be in developing the skills students need to navigate the real world. You’ll learn about “fooling” students and the importance of developing critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy in the classroom. We’ll also share real strategies and lesson examples that help build these essential skills and engage students in learning.

And don’t forget to grab your Science Connections study guide to track your learning and find additional resources!

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Melanie Trecek-King (00:00):

We say knowledge is power, but it’s not enough to know things. And there’s too much to know. So being able to think and not fall for someone’s bunk is my goal for my students.

Eric Cross (00:12):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. On this third season, we’ve been talking about science’s underdog status. And just this past March at the NSTA conference in Atlanta, I had the chance to speak with science educators from around the country about this very topic.

Hermia Simanu (00:28):

Right now, there’s only two teachers in our high school teaching science.

Shane Dongilli (00:32):

I have 45 minutes once a week with each class. The focus is reading and math.

Alexis Tharpe (00:38):

Oftentimes science gets put by the wayside. And you know, I love math and I love my language arts, but I also think science needs to place be placed on that high pedestal as well.

Askia Little (00:46):

In fifth grade, oh, they teach science, because that’s the only grade that it’s tested.

Eric Cross (00:50):

That was Hermia Simanu from American Samoa. Her team flew for three days to make it to the conference. You also heard from Shane Dongilli from North Carolina, Alexis Tharpe from Virginia, and Askia Little from Texas. All of these teachers were excited to be at the conference and had a lot to say about the state of science education in their local schools. Throughout this season, we’ve been trying to make the case for science, showing how science can be utilized more effectively in the classroom. We’ve explored the evidence showing that science supports literacy instruction. We’ve talked about science and the responsible use of technology like AI. My hope is that all of you listeners out there can use some of this evidence to feel empowered to make the case for science in your own communities. And on this episode, we’re going to examine how science can help develop what might be the most important skill that we try to develop in our students: Good thinking. On this episode, I’m joined by a biologist who actually advocated for eliminating the Intro to Bio course at her college. Instead, Professor Trecek-King created a new course focused on critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy skills. In this conversation, we discuss why the science classroom is such a good environment for helping students become better thinkers. Now, I don’t think that you can make a much stronger argument for science than using it to develop the skills that Melanie describes in this conversation. So, without further ado, I’m thrilled to bring you this conversation with Melanie Trecek-King, Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College, and creator of Thinking Is Power. Here’s Melanie.

Eric Cross (02:29):

Well, Melanie, thank you for joining us on the show. It’s so good to have you.

Melanie Trecek-King (02:34):

I am so happy to be here.

Eric Cross (02:35):

Now, I went to your session at NSTA in Chicago … I think it was two years ago. A couple years ago. And I was listening to your session, and as I was listening to you, I started Reverse Engineering in my mind what you were doing with your college students. I started reverse engineering the K–8. I was like, “This is amazing.” Where has what you’ve been doing been hiding? We need this not just in the college, higher ed. We need this all the way up and down. Because I hadn’t seen it before. So I think a good place for us to start is gonna be like the story of how and why you as a biologist wound up making the case to actually eliminate the Intro to Biology course at your college. So can you start off and tell us a little bit about that story?

Melanie Trecek-King (03:20):

Sure. So I started teaching at a community college in Massachusetts. And I absolutely love teaching at a community college. And I was teaching the courses that people who don’t wanna be scientists when they grow up have to take to fulfill their science requirement. And that course was Intro Bio. And I tried every way I could figure out to make that class be useful,] relevant to students. I mean, the thing is, our world is based on science and you have to understand science to be a good consumer of information, to make good decisions. And I’m a biologist, so it pains me to say this, but you know, somewhere in the middle of teaching students about the stages of mitosis and protein synthesis, I thought, “Is this really — like, if I have one semester that’s gonna be the last chance that someone’s gonna get a science education, is this really what they need?” And I just decided, “No.” So, to my college’s credit, they were very supportive. I went to them and said, “You know, I think we should assess the non-majors courses. Like, why do we teach non-majors science?” And we all agreed, well, it was for science literacy. OK, great. Do our existing non-majors courses do that? And so we evaluated each of the courses. I made a case that Intro Bio was not doing it. And so we actually replaced it with a course that I call Science for Life. And the whole course is designed to teach science literacy, critical thinking, and information literacy skills.

Eric Cross (04:48):

And so you did this while you were looking at mitosis. And you’re looking at students who may or may not be science majors. And then kind of asking that question. I know every educator asks this, and whether or not it’s welcomed or supported is a different question: “Is what I’m teaching actually gonna be relevant and useful later on down the road for this group of students?” And you actually got to run with it and then create this course, this new course. So, what were the skills that you were hoping to achieve with the new course you developed, and and why were those skills so important?

Melanie Trecek-King (05:21):

Well, if I just go back for a second to what you said, ’cause it, really hit me: I remember the actual moment — it had been building up to that point, but the actual moment that it hit me — I was teaching students the stages of mitosis. And I was applying it to cancer, because the thought is that if we use issues that are relevant to students to teach concepts, that it will be more meaningful to them. They’ll learn it better; they’ll be able to apply it. And they just looked absolutely deflated. They didn’t wanna be there. And I had this moment where I thought, “You know, if, if these students ever have cancer somewhere in their lives, is what I taught them going to be something that they remember? Is it going to be useful to them?” And quite frankly, like, no. <Laugh> They’re not gonna remember proto-oncogenes. And quite frankly, is that really what they need to know at that moment? What they need to know is, “What does this mean? Who is a reliable source of information here? If these treatments are recommended, what is the evidence for them? What are the cost-benefit analyses? Where do I go to find reliable information?” And in that space, cancer in particular, we have this whole field of — I wanna say charlatans, ’cause they may not actually be lying, but they’re pedaling false cures, false hopes. And people need that kind of hope, and so in their time of need, they’re more likely to fall for that kind of thing. Which leads me to the skills that I teach students. I call them this tree of skills. And the order is important. I start — and there’s a lot of overlap to be fair — but critical thinking, and then information literacy, and science literacy. The idea is that students carry in their pockets access to basically all of human’s knowledge at this moment in time. And if they needed to access it, they could. The question is, do they know what they’re looking for? Are they aware of their own biases that are leading them to certain sources, or certain false hopes? Are there certain things that are making them more vulnerable to the people that might prey on them? Are they able to use that information to make good decisions? There’s a great Carl Sagan quote, and it’s something like, “If we teach people only the findings of science, no matter how useful or even inspiring they may be, without communicating the method, then how is anyone to be able to tell the difference between science and pseudoscience?” So yes, the process of science is a process of critical thinking. However, we do tend to present science most of the time. Like, here’s what science has learned. And to be fair, those things that we’ve learned from science are really useful and inspiring. But if we don’t teach the process, so you’ve got somebody now who let’s say has been diagnosed with cancer and is on their phone and they’re scrolling through social media and everything looks the same. And of course the algorithms learn who you are. Next thing you know, there’s all of these like pseudo-treatments popping up. It all looks the same. Somebody who says that acupuncture can be used to cure cancer can feel the same, from someone who doesn’t understand the process of science, as a medical fact. And so the process is the process of critical thinking. My class everything is open note. The quizzes are open note. The exams — and I say open note, they’re also open online, because I know for the rest of their life they’re gonna have resources available to them; I want them to be good consumers with that information, which to me requires metacognition and critical thinking and information literacy and all those skills that I’m trying to teach them.

Eric Cross (08:58):

You’re basically taking what … we’ve taught science for so long. And more recently, it’s changed to more focusing on skills. At least in K through 12. But a lot of it was just memorization of a ton of different things that now we can pull up our phone, go on the internet. You can pull up a lot of those facts. But those facts don’t necessarily translate to actual real-world skills. When I listen to… I kind of make this analogy sometimes: students say … it’s funny, I have 12-year-olds that say this. They go, “How come they don’t teach us how to do our taxes?” And you know they’re regurgitating what they hear from adults, right? “Teach us real-world skills!” And I was like, really, if we taught you right now how to do your taxes, how many of you would really be like, “Oh, this is an awesome lesson! We’re really engaged!” But their point is that “I wanna learn something that I could actually use later on, that’s that I’m gonna carry on.” And in your course, you’re talking about these skills that actually can apply. Like you said, if I had cancer and I’m looking at different types of medical procedures, do I have the skills to really be able to evaluate and make informed decisions on that? And that’s, that’s not something that I’ve seen explicitly taught really anywhere. And I hadn’t heard anybody talk about it, really, until I heard your session, where you’ve kind of unpacked this, and over the last couple of years, have created some programs or resources for educators, where they can take this into their classroom. So what were some of those skills, again? What were were some of the skills that you thought, “I wanna make sure that my students can walk out and they know how to do this and apply it to maybe several different fields”?

Melanie Trecek-King (10:35):

Oh, that’s a really good question. Because the whole thing was a process for me. Like, when I finally let go of Intro Bio, I was so glad to see that class go, by the way. ‘Cause I just felt like I was beating a dead horse. So when I let go of it, I thought, “What do they need instead?” And for me, what I realized was I was trying to make the class I would’ve wanted to take. I realized the things that I personally didn’t know, that my own education maybe let me down a bit. But things that I thought were important. So then I took all of those, synthesized them, tried to figure out the best order. The class is currently in its third iteration. And I hope every iteration is an improvement. But I’m thinking about the students that I taught before the pandemic. It was Intro Bio. Up to just maybe the couple years before the pandemic, and during the pandemic, we had a new virus and we had a new vaccine and we had new treatments. There was hydroxychloroquine and there was ivermectin and then there’s masks. Are masks effective? Well, you know, in what circumstances? What kind of mask? There are all of these questions. And that whole thing was we saw science playing out in real time.

Eric Cross (11:50):

Absolutely.

Melanie Trecek-King (11:51):

And so were my students able to follow that? And then what happened in that process is that science became politicized. And in a time where things are uncertain and we need answers, ’cause it’s scary, people want certainty and science doesn’t tend to provide that. Especially when it’s just starting out. And then when it becomes politicized, people decide that they’re going to — it’s not necessarily a conscious decision — but they retreat into what people in their camps are saying or their groups are saying. Which actually leads me to one of the more important parts of information literacy skills in there, which is most of our knowledge is shared. We tend to have overinflated senses of what we individually know. And studies actually show that with Google, if you have access to Google, you think you’re smarter than if you don’t have access to Google. But we all have access to knowledge in our communities, and that’s one of the reasons humans are so successful, is that we can each specialize in different things and share our expertise and become greater than the sum of our parts. The problem with that, of course, is that we forget what we don’t know, and we assume that we know what the community knows. And so recognizing the limits of your own knowledge and how different communities produce knowledge, like the different epistemic processes that communities use to come to knowledge. When it comes down to it, an important part of knowing is knowing who to trust, right? Knowing where the source of knowledge lives. And in order to do that, you have to understand the processes that they’re using to come to that knowledge and the limits of your own knowledge. And then how to find who has that knowledge so that you can use that to make better decisions.

Eric Cross (13:38):

So, when I hear what you’re doing with your college students, and I think about what I’m doing in the classroom, in the middle school, we are really focusing on literacy as skills. Reading, writing, speaking, listening. And then when I think of the next step of the journey, your information literacy and the literacy you’re teaching is really the application of those things in the real world. And the examples that you gave are very critical examples. Evaluating claims about Covid. Making informed decisions about a medical procedure that you might need. And we all get that applied to us. We’re scrolling through social media and somehow social media is listening. It’s figuring out exactly what I’m doing, because all of a sudden the ads are telling me … how did you know I was alking about KitchenAid mixers now? I just said KitchenAid mixers and it’s gonna show up in my feed! But <laugh> I take that in the same way from the same place that I take in maybe an oncologist. So it’s it’s coming through the same channels. So now I kind of wanna pivot. So we’ve talked about what you’re doing, why you’re doing it, the connection between “am I really teaching the skills that my students need in the science class? Is it really critical thinking explicitly or is it just kind of implied?” Now I wanna ask you how you do it. What’s the annotated, abbreviated kind of syllabus of your course?

Melanie Trecek-King (15:03):

So the course is called Science for Life. And the premise behind it is the kinds of skills and understanding of the process of science that they would need to make good decisions to be empowered in a world based on science. And so the very first lecture, I say, “OK, I’m gonna tell you a story and I just want you to listen to the story. And at the end I’m gonna ask you why I told the story.” And the story that I tell them is some of the history of the witchcraft trials in Europe. And I start with the Malleus Maleficarum, or the Hammer of Witches, from the Pope, and about how people would accuse witches of causing birth defects or storms or crops dying. And, the best evidence that they had to absolutely know somebody was a witch was if somebody accused them, and then if they were accused, if they confessed. OK? But the problem is, to get them to confess, they would torture them. Roasting over coals, or splitting until somebody broke. And so I tell my students, “OK, this was absolute proof that someone was guilty of witchcraft. I don’t know about you; I would confess to anything, right? Make it stop!” So this is where I get to ask students, “Why would I ask you this? Why would I tell you this story? And traumatize you on the very first day of lecture?” And they see the reasoning, right? They thought they had evidence. The question was, is that good evidence? And so, you know, I’m getting students to have a basic understanding of epistemology, right? Without calling it that, or without going into all of the philosophical background of epistemology. Apply this to your own reasoning. What are you wrong about? Well, you probably wouldn’t know. OK, how would you know if you were wrong? Like what kinds of things do you feel that you’re so right about? How good is your evidence for that? So what I want them to do is internalize the thinking about thinking, and analyzing how they come to conclusions, and proportioning how strongly they believe. Their confidence in how right they are. So I think starting with that kind of misinformation, and getting students to internalize that process is important. But I think the example is really useful, because most of my students don’t believe in witchcraft. Right? So it’s not an issue that would immediately threaten them in some way. So when, when a belief is tied to identity or how we see ourselves or is really important to us, then it’s very difficult to be objective about that belief. And so by starting with witchcraft, it’s not triggering. I get them to think about thinking and practice that muscle so that when we get to those more important issues, they have the skills they need to evaluate them.

Eric Cross (17:55):

So would it be fair to say that your Science for Life class is really applied scientific thinking for the real world?

Melanie Trecek-King (18:01):

Absolutely. That’s the idea. I mean, science is too good to keep to ourselves, right? And it’s everywhere. So how can you understand the world through a scientific lens?

Eric Cross (18:10):

What are the nuts and bolts of how you teach your students these strategies? What do you do? What are some strategies and techniques that we can maybe share with listeners? And then where I want to go after that is I wanna ask you, how early do you think this can be started? So lemme start off first with, what do you do?

Melanie Trecek-King (18:28):

So I use three different strategies. One is, I provide students with a toolkit. And the toolkit is one that I created and it is like my one toolkit to rule them all. It is trying to apply critical thinking and science reasoning all together in one place. So that if students are met with a claim, they’ve got the toolkit with an acronym. They can now start and have somewhere to go. In that if I gave you a claim and said, “Just critically think through this claim,” I mean, that’s a mighty task. But if you have a structured toolkit, then it’s hopefully a systemic way that’s helpful. The toolkit is summarized by FLOATER. I have published it on Skeptical Inquirer. It’s free. So it’s Falsifiability, Logical, Objectivity, Alternative Explanations, Tentative Conclusions, Evidence, and Reproducibility. So I provide students with a toolkit. The next thing I do is I use a lot of misinformation in class. Back to what Carl Sagan says: What I heard was we should use pseudoscience to teach students the difference between a pseudo-scientific process and a scientific process. So, I use science denial, conspiracy theories, and give my students a lot of opportunities to practice evaluating claims with the toolkit. And the other thing I do is, I use inoculation activities. So inoculation theory is based on William McGuire’s original research in the ’60s, which is basically like a vaccine analogy. Where you can inject a small amount of a virus or bacterium into the body, so that it creates an immune response, so that it can learn the real thing. And so in the real world, it can fight it off. Inoculation theory does the same thing, but with misinformation. So, what we can do is, in controlled environments, expose students to little bits of misinformation so that they can recognize it in the real world. There’s different kinds of inoculation, but I’m a big fan of what’s called active and technique-based inoculation. So technique-based means that students are learning not the facts of misinformation, not factually why this thing is wrong, but about the technique used to deceive. So maybe the use of fake experts. Or maybe the use of anecdotes. Or the use of logical fallacies. The other part of that is active, which is where students create the misinformation. So for example, my students, just now, we finished covering pseudoscience. And I teach students the characteristics of pseudoscience. And basically we have fun with it. Where they pretend to be grifters and they sell a pseudoscience product. And so they have to make an ad like they’d see on social media, using the different techniques. And the point there is that it’s supposed to be funny, right? And lighthearted. But in a real way, by using the techniques used to sell something like pseudoscience, it’s opening their eyes. You can’t unsee how every alternative product has, “it’s an all-natural and used for centuries and millions use it and look at this person who says, ‘Wow, it worked for me!’ And it’s certified by some society that doesn’t exist, but this doctor behind it says that it’s really great!” I mean, it’s all the same stuff. So they create the misinformation using their own techniques.

Eric Cross (22:02):

That’s one of my favorite things that you’ve talked about, and I want to dive in that a little bit more. But when you’re teaching the toolkit, FLOATER, what does that look like in the classroom, when you’re actually breaking all of those things down? What does it look like as you’re walking your students through this, and you’re kind of coaching them on all of those different things? ‘Cause I feel like some things might be like, “Oh yeah, I got that.” And then some of them might be, “Oh, what is that?”

Melanie Trecek-King (22:24):

Yeah, it takes me probably a good solid lecture to get through the basis of the toolkit. But then over the rest of the semester, I’ll spend more time going into different parts, different rules, a bit more in-depth. So, for example, logical fallacies and objectivity. So the rule of objectivity basically states that you need to be honest with yourself. I’m gonna quote Feynman here, so: “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.” We don’t tend to think that we can be fooled. But of course we can. So actually, if you wanna talk about it, I start class by fooling my students.

Eric Cross (23:03):

Wait, what do you do? What do you do for that?

Melanie Trecek-King (23:05):

Oh, so this is really fun. Day 1 of class, after the syllabus, I tell my … so you’re in my class now, Eric. “So I have a friend, and she’s a psychic. She’s an astrologer and she’s pretty good at what she does. I mean, she’s got books and she’s been on TV and stuff. She knows I teach this course about skepticism. And so she’s agreed to test how effective she is by providing personality assessments to students in class. So if you wanna participate, what I need from you is your birthday, your full name, answer a few questions. Like, if your house was on fire and you could take one thing, what would it be? Or if you could get paid for anything to do anything for a living, what would it be? Um, there’s a third one. Oh! If you could have any superpower, what would it be?” So the next class, it’s usually over a weekend. The next class I say, “OK, I’ve got your personality assessments back, but remember, we wanna test how effective she is. So in order to do that, I need you to read your profile as quietly as possible. And then I’m gonna have you rate her accuracy on a scale of 1 to 5. OK? So close your eyes; rate her.” Over the years doing this, it’s about a 4.3 to 4.5 out of 5. They think she’s pretty accurate. OK? “So now, if you feel comfortable, get with a person next to you. And I want you to talk about what parts of the personality assessment really spoke to you and, and why, and why you thought she was accurate or not.” And it takes them 5, 10 minutes before they realize they all got the same one. So, this is not my original experiment. It was first done by Bertram Forer in … I think it was the ’50s. And it’s done in psychology classrooms. James Randi made it famous. But the personality assessment itself is full of what are called Barnum statements. So, named after P.T. Barnum. These are statements that are very generic. So, “You have a need to be liked and admired by people. You are often quiet and reserved, but there are times where you can be the life of the party.”

Eric Cross (25:13):

How do you know this about me, by the way? This is a — I feel like you know me right now.

Melanie Trecek-King (25:17):

“There are times where you’ve wondered whether you’ve done the right thing.”

Eric Cross (25:19):

This is getting weird.

Melanie Trecek-King (25:21):

I’m just on fire, right? So these are Barnum statements. They’re the basis of personality assessment.

Eric Cross (25:29):

Mel, can I pause you right there? You said Barnum. Is that the same Barnum, like Barnum & Bailey Circus?

Melanie Trecek-King (25:34):

Yeah. P.T. Barnum, who didn’t actually say “There’s a sucker born every minute,” but we attribute him with that kind of ethos. These statements though, if you read a horoscope or even like personality indicators, like the MBTI, it is basically pseudo-scientific. And it ends up with lots of these Barnum statements. They produce what’s called the Barnum Effect, which is, “Wow, that’s so me! How did you know me?” I could even do more. Like, you have a box of photos in your house that need to be sorted. Or unused prescriptions. And these can apply to nearly everyone, but they produce this effect where we go, “Wow, that is so me!” Right? So by fooling them this way, I get to … well, so the next thing is, “Yes, I lied to you. And I’d like to tell you I won’t do that again. But I’m not going to, ’cause I might. So be on your guard.” But I did it for free. And why did I do it? “I did it because I could tell you ‘I could fool you,’ but you wouldn’t necessarily believe me. So I fooled you, so that you would learn what it feels like to be fooled.” It’s not fun. But we’re gonna make a joke outta this. And students are almost never upset about this ’cause it’s a fun process and they’re all fooled. And again, the point is, I didn’t disprove psychic powers. I didn’t just disprove psychics with this exercise. But I did show you how easy it was to fake. So if somebody is gonna tell you that they can know these things about you through some way, hopefully the evidence they provide should be stronger than something that’s easily faked. Right? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you claim to be able to read my personality based on my birthdate, then I need more than something that you can be taught to do in 15 minutes. So, I fool them to convince them that they could be fooled.

Eric Cross (27:27):

You’re giving them a practice scenario for thinking. And I was thinking about basketball. I grew up playing basketball. And my coach would have our own team be the defenders of the next team we were gonna play, so that we can be prepared for the defense. We were gonna see. Now, when I’m thinking about education, and what you just said reminded me of this, it’s like we’re often just teaching offense. We’re always teaching the plays. We’re always teaching what to do. But we rarely teach defense. What happens when someone comes towards you and, and they challenge you or they come at you with claims? How do we evaluate this? And I think in pockets we do it. We do claim-evidence-reasoning. We present claims and evidence and reasoning. But we don’t always have practice defending them. And I think there’s great resources. There’s Argumentation Toolkit and there’s all these awesome resources that do this. But does that fit? You’re kind of having them practice defense?

Melanie Trecek-King (28:26):

Yeah. You know, that’s brilliant. I never considered that analogy. But, yeah, in the real world, you don’t just get to always try to score all the time. Someone’s gonna challenge you and give you a claim that maybe you haven’t heard before. So how do you think through it?

Eric Cross (28:41):

Yeah. And you become better. So now I’m thinking about how early could we start doing this? For one, I love the idea of lying to your students, because I do that. And it’s just such a fun scenario. How early could we start implementing these strategies or these ideas or these toolkits? In your mind, what do you imagine? How early could we start this with young people?

Melanie Trecek-King (29:07):

Yeah. I’m so glad you asked that question, ’cause honestly, by the time they get to me, it’s almost too late. And I don’t wanna say it’s too late, ’cause it’s never too late. But, oh, we need to start so much earlier! That example that I gave about the selling pseudoscience argument? I have a wonderful colleague, Bertha Vasquez, who’s a middle school teacher in Miami and the director of TIES at CFI. She did this with her middle school students. And quite frankly, their examples were just as good, or in some cases better, than my college students. And they had so much fun with it, too. And she just said that, you know, <laugh>, they actually are more savvy with the kinds of things that they see online than we — I don’t wanna say give them credit for. But almost that we want to believe. My students give me examples of things that are from corners of the internet that I didn’t know existed. And quite frankly, that’s probably a good thing for my own mental health. But students are on there too, like middle school students, and we need to prepare them for the kinds of things that they see in the wild.

Eric Cross (30:13):

So in middle school, definitely. Now, you’ve also done some work in high school as well, right? In Oklahoma? Did you do some. …?

Melanie Trecek-King (30:17):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (30:18):

…some work with high schoolers? What was that like? Did you see any impact there?

Melanie Trecek-King (30:21):

So I didn’t actually do it in Oklahoma. I have taught the course … actually, you were talking about younger kids. I’ve taught the course to high schoolers in my area that are parts of dual enrollment. And they absolutely ate up the curriculum. And they were wonderful, wonderful students. And it was completely appropriate for … they were juniors, actually. But the course has also been taught in Oklahoma, through a dual enrollment program as well. And it was a small sample size. But we have pre-post testing that showed that it improved their critical thinking, their acceptance of science. But anecdotally the head of the program there said that in his years doing this, he’d never seen a course that helped them improve in their other courses so well. So, I felt very rewarded by hearing this. But apparently their critical thinking skills and information literacy skills helped them succeed in their other courses that they were taking. And I love that the students were transferring those skills to other classes. That’s the whole point.

Eric Cross (31:23):

And that’s a big … I think that what you just said is really the core, especially of what we’ve been talking about this season: What you’re talking about and what you’re teaching can transfer and supports literacy. And this is an example of science doing that across all other content areas. So I think that that’s huge, that that was said. What do people say about this course? I know I went on your website, and I looked at some of the comments that some folks were saying, and I know it’s just a snippet, but what do you hear from the education world about this? Because I don’t see it in many places. I see it kind of embedded, sprinkled into different content areas. But you’re actually teaching it explicitly. Do you tend to find positive feedback, overwhelmingly? Or do you get pushback on on some of this? What’s it been like for you?

Melanie Trecek-King (32:16):

I think the biggest pushback — and it’s good pushback, and I would agree entirely — is with inoculation activities, you do need to be careful to, when you debrief students, you wanna tell them why you did what you did and to use their powers for good and not for fooling other people. And I think importantly, for not putting misinformation out into the wild without having context around it. So if you do these kinds of inoculation activities, like if you have your students create pseudoscience ads, don’t just let them put them on social media. Obviously, you can’t control everything that they’re doing. But explain to them why you wouldn’t wanna do that. As far as everything else, I’ve heard really great feedback. You’re referencing my website. So, when I put together the course, I was trying to find resources for students to read. Textbooks are ridiculously expensive and I couldn’t find anything that I really wanted students to buy. So I just started writing, and I put it on my site. I have a site that’s basically the core of the curriculum. More in progress. And then I’ve got some of the topics that we explore and those are all assigned readings. My students are captive, in that I know they want a grade, and for four months they have to sit with me for the entire semester, in that I’ve specifically ordered the content in a way that would be most conducive to them learning these things. On the internet, though, and on social media, ’cause I post on there as well, people come in from all kinds of entry points, and so the goal would be to have them start at the beginning and go to the end. But people … I’m pleasantly surprised that there is an audience for critical thinking and science literacy content out there. And so that really warms my heart. But I am doing more and more for educators. And so I have a section for educators. I put content on there. I put assignments, the assignments that we’ve talked about and more, are on there. And the educators that I’ve had use it have just been really wonderful. Like, I hear great things. If I might, the biggest issue that I’m having is actually reaching educators. I’ve gone to — I met you at NSCA, actually, that was only last summer.

Eric Cross (34:30):

Oh, wow. Wow.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:32):

Right?

Eric Cross (34:32):

Yeah, you’re right. It wasn’t even a year.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:35):

Yeah, I think it was like July last year. So, um, you’ve been to the conferences. And I just went to the last one as well. But I have yet to figure out a way to really get in front of enough educators to share the content. So if anybody’s listening and is interested in learning more, please let me know! <Laugh>

Eric Cross (34:52):

Yes. And we talked about your website, but I didn’t say what the website was. So it’s ThinkingIsPower.com.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:57):

Yes.

Eric Cross (34:58):

And on there, there’s tons of resources. There is the toolkit. And it’s all free.

Melanie Trecek-King (35:06):

Yes.

Eric Cross (35:07):

And there’s a dope t-shirt on there that I just bought today, that Melanie’s actually wearing right now. It says, “Be curious, be skeptical, and be humble.” And I love that. Because I think one of the things that we can’t forget about teaching people how to think and critically evaluating information, sometimes those conversations can become very dehumanizing. And what I mean by that is it sometimes can become, like, intellectual sport, where we forget that there’s a human being on the other other side. And we lose that empathy and compassion. We can kind of see that. It just becomes this intellectual jousting and arguing. And one of the things I know about you, and when you talk about this or you talk about the work that you do, and even the shirt that you’re wearing, there’s this, “be humble.” There’s this human that is never lost in this. And you said it, too: When you’re teaching your students and you’re equipping them with all of these intellectual skills and all of these tools, to use it for good. So to maintain your humanity, to maintain your character, and then to use it to edify and lift people up, not to go out and do harm. That balance, I think, is so, so important. So it’s something that I really appreciate about you and how you teach.

Melanie Trecek-King (36:19):

I appreciate those kind words. Actually—

Eric Cross (36:21):

Oh, of course!

Melanie Trecek-King (36:22):

—and if I might, I sometimes see people using critical thinking like a weapon. It’s like, “I have learned fallacies and I’m just gonna use the tools of critical thinking to tell you why you’re stupid, or why you’re wrong, and why my position is right!” But real critical thinking involves applying those same standards to your own thought processes. And even something like argumentation: the goal of our argumentation is not to BE right; it’s to GET it right. And so we’re on the same team. If we’re arguing about something, if the idea is in scientific argumentation we’re trying to find the truth, which one of us is making a better argument based on the evidence? Can your perspective help me see my own blind spots and vice versa? And the more different perspectives that we have, the more able we are to find whatever reality is. But we are in this together. And so, yeah, I think … I’m glad to hear that that’s coming through. But if you don’t have the kind of humility that says, “You know, I could be wrong,” then you’re never gonna change your mind anyway. So having the humility to say, I’m wrong. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (37:33):

Yeah. You end up just seeing people just defend turf, as opposed to support “look for truth.” And I know for me, my own education journey, I end up with more questions than answers anyways. So I go in trying to find an answer for something and I end up with 10 more questions. And I go, “OK, this is kind of how it is.” You go down this rabbit hole and you just end up with all these different questions. And it forces the humility, because you’re like, “I don’t know! I think this is what it could be, but it could also be these other answers or explanations. So this is just where I’m at, based on what we know right now, at this present time, which might shift.”

Melanie Trecek-King (38:07):

And that sounds reasonable. Yes. Which might shift. Yes.

Eric Cross (38:11):

And especially for us as life-science biology teachers, our content is something that definitely shifts. I know some of the things I teach now are not things that I learned when I was even in middle school. Just because things evolve. They change. We learn, we get new data. That’s just the way it is.

Melanie Trecek-King (38:24):

<Sighs> And Pluto is no longer a planet.

Eric Cross (38:26):

I know. Rest in — well, no, Pluto’s still there. Yeah. It’s no longer a planet. But that was one part of my kindergarten memorizations <laugh> is Pluto being in there.

Melanie Trecek-King (38:36):

Gotta change your mind.

Eric Cross (38:38):

I know. Any words of advice for science educators out there who want to focus more on honing these critical thinking skills and strategies with their own students, but they don’t know where to start? Where would you point them? Or what advice would you give them?

Melanie Trecek-King (38:52):

I think start with what you want the students to know. And not necessarily the FACTS that you want students to know, but start with the skills that you want them to know. And then really be honest with your process. When I designed Science for Life, I started with, “these are the skills that I want students to know.” And everything was in service of that. So this sort of backwards design, I think, helped me follow a path that was more likely to be useful, if that makes any sense. But it really required doing it all over again. So don’t be afraid to question the things that you’re currently doing, even if that’s all you’ve been taught or all you know.

Eric Cross (39:41):

What I’m hearing is, don’t be afraid to question your own assumptions about what you’re doing. And don’t be afraid to adapt or change or modify. Kinda, pivot. Be flexible.

Melanie Trecek-King (39:51):

Yes, be flexible and pivot. And this is where I’m in a different position than middle school and high school educators. Because I have complete freedom over what I teach in my class.

Eric Cross (40:01):

Sure.

Melanie Trecek-King (40:01):

At the end of the semester, I always joke with non-majors that there’s nothing they have to know, which actually gives me a lot of flexibility, because I could teach ’em a lot of different things. So if there are things that you have to teach students, obviously that’s one thing. But I personally think that the way that we’ve been teaching science needs a refresher. A rethinking. And so I would say, “If you want your students to learn science literacy, honestly ask, what does that mean to you? And what would that look like to get to that point?” For me, though, it was also keeping in mind that maybe I didn’t already know the best way to do that.

Eric Cross (40:43):

One of the things you mentioned earlier is trying to reach out to educators. And I know that when we work together, it’s a force multiplier. And what you’re doing is developing skills. And there’s these skills that are happening right now in academia that you’re doing. And then how do we transfer that into middle and high school. Or, I’m sorry, middle and elementary school, high school. We need to get more people into this conversation to kind of brainstorm and figure that out. We have a Facebook group, Science Connections: The Community, where we have educators that gather. That can be one place we start the conversation. And again, I know on your website you’ve been super active on social media; you’ve grown your presence on Twitter and all these different places, engaging with folks. Which is awesome. ‘Cause I know I see your posts and I’m saving the things that you’re posting and I’m thinking of ways that I can do it in my classroom. I’m gonna take that product. By the way, is that on your website, the lesson that you do with the product?

Melanie Trecek-King (41:43):

No, actually. So the article, “How to Sell Pseudoscience” is … I know Bertha Vasquez wrote up a version of it.

Eric Cross (41:50):

Maybe we can grab that. ‘Cause we might be able to put that into the show notes for folks, because she’s a middle school educator. If there’s already something that’s been done for teachers like us, we’re like, “Yeah, let me get that and let me remix it and make it my own!” if there’s already a exemplar out there.

Melanie Trecek-King (42:04):

Yeah, she’s done it. And so I will absolutely share that with you.

Eric Cross (42:08):

So, all season long, we’ve been talking about science as the underdog. We kind of framed it, you know, science oftentimes takes a back seat to math and English. It’s kinda the first thing to go. Or the first area where time can get cut. Because of what gets tested gets focused on, oftentimes. And then in addition to that, when you’re a multi-subject teacher, elementary science isn’t just one thing — it’s every field. You know, you’re a biologist, which is different than a geologist. And when you’re teaching every subject, that’s a lot. And you might not have had a science class for years. And the realities that we’re seeing over and over with different researchers and practitioners is that science could actually enhance literacy, and building those skills. And I think you really talked about it with the critical thinking skills. Those can transfer. Or the administrator that said, “This is one of the only courses I’ve seen where it transfers to other areas.” Could you share maybe with our listeners, just any advice for advocating for science in their own world?

Melanie Trecek-King (43:13):

Wow, I’m not sure I’m qualified to answer that question! One of the things that comes to mind though — because I was listening to your last episode and educators … I honestly didn’t realize how little time they had for science. And how often science was then the first to go, to allow room for other subjects. But science overlaps with a lot of other issues. And so I feel like there could be a way to bring in science when teaching these other subjects. So, for example, argumentation and logical fallacies are easy to apply to reading and writing. Information literacy, and being able to find good information online, teaching students how to laterally read, to be able to check a source, or how to use Google effectively, to put in neutral search terms to find sources, or teaching students how to recognize the characteristics of conspiratorial thinking: All of these things can overlap with so many other subjects. So the scientist in me is a little biased towards science being important enough to do this. But try to bring it into the other subjects. It doesn’t have to be completely separate.

Eric Cross (44:43):

So integrating science into other things. And I … big believer. And a hundred percent agree with you. Now I’m gonna ask a question that kinda like takes us backwards. You shared an app with me when we first met that I thought was really cool. And I know it’s a friend or colleague of yours. But as a middle school teacher, I thought it was great, because it was something that my students could download and practice some of the skills that you’re talking about. Would you talk a little bit about the cranky uncle? Is it the Cranky Uncle app?

Melanie Trecek-King (45:17):

Cranky Uncle.

Eric Cross (45:18):

Could you share a little bit about that?

Melanie Trecek-King (45:20):

Yeah. Cranky Uncle is awesome. So, Cranky Uncle is the brainchild of John Cook, who is the founder of Skeptical Science and the author of the 97% Consensus study on climate change. Cranky Uncle … so he’s also a cartoonist. And Cranky Uncle is a cartoon game where … I don’t even have to explain who Cranky Uncle is to my students. Everybody inherently gets the, the character, right? So he’s like the guy at Thanksgiving that you don’t wanna talk to because he denies climate change and he’s just really cranky. But Cranky Uncle uses the techniques of science denial, which are summarized by the acronym FLICC: So it’s Fake experts, Logical fallacies, Impossible expectations, Cherry-picking, and Conspiratorial thinking. So he uses those techniques. Again, this is technique-based inoculation. So they recognize the techniques in the game, and you earn cranky points. And as you make Cranky crankier and crankier because you’re recognizing his techniques, you learn the techniques of science denial, and level up and open up other techniques. This is another one of those examples where climate change has a lot of science behind it, right? And if you wanted to get to the science behind climate change for any particular issue … so let’s say it’s cold today, so I’m gonna say there’s no climate change. OK? If I’m gonna unpack that at a factual level, and with science, we could be here for a while. But if I told you, “That’s like saying, ‘I just ate a sandwich so there’s no global hunger.’” OK? So that’s a parallel argument. Humorous. Love to use this kind of argumentation, ’cause it makes for some … I mean, it’s funny, but you get the point. It’s an anecdote. And anecdotes aren’t good evidence. So just like that, you could teach the technique of using an anecdotal fallacy for climate-change denial. So, I have my students play this game. You could do it when you’re studying argumentation. You could do it for science denial. I use an inoculation extension with that, where I have my students pretend that … um, actually, back up for a second. So I teach a class on critical thinking. And at the end of semesters I would get emails from students on, well, they’re failing the class, but they really shouldn’t, for all of these reasons. And reading these emails, I’m like, “If you think that’s a good argument, you clearly didn’t learn what I was hoping you would learn.” So I now have my students, early in the semester, after they play Cranky, pretend that it is the end of the semester and you’re failing the class and you’re failing because you didn’t do the work. Use at least four of the fallacies from class to argue for why you should pass. So they have to put it on a discussion forum, and they’ll say things like, “Well, if you fail me, then I won’t get into graduate school and then people will die and it will all be your fault.” Or, “My dog died, and so I was really sad.” Or, um, “You’re just a terrible teacher. And you’re short. So I don’t like you.” Or that kind of thing. So, oh, they love to attack my character. It’s really funny. But it’s supposed to be funny. And the point is, the students are using those arguments, they’re using the fallacies, to argue for something. And so by creating that misinformation themselves, they learn how those fallacies work. But taken together, I mean, everything that we just talked about there, Cranky Uncle, and the fallacy assignment, or whatever iteration you want that to be in, that doesn’t have to be in a purely science unit. Right? That could be sociology. It could be argumentation. It could be English.

Eric Cross (49:01):

Absolutely. That could be totally a prompt in an English class. And practiced in there. And then this could be an interdisciplinary thing, going back and forth between English and and science. Just having these discussions and looking at it from different angles. And you’re practicing the skills in two different contexts. So you get into argumentation. And then that app, I know I had fun with it. And the questions on there definitely resonate with people in my own family. I’m like, “I feel like I’m talking to exactly somebody that I’m related to right now.” <Laugh> Melanie, anything else that you wanna share, or discuss or highlight, before we wrap up?

Melanie Trecek-King (49:39):

So we could talk about lateral reading, if you like. ‘Cause I know a lot of educators use the crap test.

Eric Cross (49:45):

Please, please, please talk about that.

Melanie Trecek-King (49:47):

So, when evaluating sources, a lot of educators teach what’s called the CRAP test. And I wish I remembered what it stood for. But basically what you do, a lot of us have been taught when you go to a website, to figure out if it’s reliable, you wanna go to the about page. Read the mission; see who they are; maybe read some of the content; evaluate the language. So is it inflammatory? Are they making logical arguments? Are the links to reputable sources as well? And the problem is that if a site wants to mislead you, they’re not going to tell you that it’s a bunk site, right? They’re just gonna do a good job of misleading you. And so, what you wanna do instead … the CRAP test basically is an evaluation of a site. And that’s what’s called vertical reading. So you’re looking through a site to determine if it’s reliable. Uh, I think his name’s Sam Wineberg at Stanford, proposed something called lateral reading. Where, instead of on the site, what you wanna do is literally open a new tab and into the search engine type the source. You could do the claim, too. And then something like Reliability or FactCheck or whatever it’s that you’re checking, and then see what other reputable sites have to say about it. So, in their study, actually, they did a really interesting study where they compared professional fact checkers to PhD historians to Stanford undergrads. And they evaluated — I wish you could … um, there’s two pediatrician organizations. One’s like the American Association of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Pediatricians, something like that. They’re very similar sounding. So you give them to students. I do this with my students as well, the same study. So I give my students those two websites. And I say, “Which one of these is more reliable?” And they do exactly what most of us do, which is spend time on the site looking around. And most of the time, if not nearly all the time, they come to the wrong conclusion. And so then I tell them what lateral reading is: “OK, instead of looking through the site, open a new tab, search the organization and reliability.” Something like that. And it takes probably 30 seconds before they realize one of them has been dubbed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. As opposed to the other one, which is like a hundred year old huge pediatrician organization that produces their own journals and so on. But nearly all my students are fooled. And in the study, none of the fact checkers were fooled. I’m gonna get the number right. It’s something like 50% of the historians and 20% of the Stanford undergraduates got the correct answer. And they spent a lot more time on it. So it’s a great way to teach students how to use the power of the internet to evaluate sources much more quickly and, effectively. And yes, use Wikipedia, right? Wikipedia is not a final answer, but Wikipedia is actually pretty accurate. So if Wikipedia is the first place you stop, then yes, go there, see what Wikipedia says, and then follow some of their sources.

Eric Cross (52:47):

What popped in my head was like, Yelp reviews for websites. That almost sounds like what it was. It’s like when I search for a product, I don’t go and read the product description marketing. ‘Cause that’s all designed to sell me on something. But I’ll go and look in Reliability, if it’s like a car, or just other sites to cross-reference. And that sounds like what you were talking about is like cross-referencing. Seeing what FactChecker [sic] said about this site, versus seeing what a site says about itself.

Melanie Trecek-King (53:14):

Well, that’s a great analogy. Because if I wanted to know if a product was effective, what the manufacturer says about the product, clearly there’s a strong chance of bias. Right? They’re going to be on their best, um, put their best foot forward. Versus, what do independent reviewers say about this product?

Eric Cross (53:35):

Yep. And I am known to research something to death. And I get something called “paralysis by analysis.”

Melanie Trecek-King (53:42):

Ohhhh, yeah.

Eric Cross (53:44):

And it’s so bad that even if I’m trying to buy, like, towels, I need to find the best-bang-for-the-buck towel. I have to defer some of these decisions out, because I’m on the internet for three hours now. I’ll be a pseudo-expert in towels, and thread count, and all of that stuff. But yeah, that maybe that’s just the science person.

Melanie Trecek-King (54:03):

I mean, I feel your pain. I do the same thing. <Laugh> It’s annoying. Like, it’s just towels. What does it really matter? But yeah.

Eric Cross (54:10):

Coffee! It doesn’t matter what it is. I just need to go, “OK, I have to use these powers for good. Otherwise I’m gonna be researching forever.”

Melanie Trecek-King (54:16):

I wanna say one other thing. So, again, this is a college class and I have a lot of freedom. But one of the driving philosophies behind the class is a wonderful quote in a book, Schick and Vaughn, How to Think about Weird Things. And they said, “The quality of your life is determined by the quality of your decisions, and the quality of your decisions is determined by the quality of your thinking.” And I know my students want a grade. But I’m really trying to teach them how to be empowered through better thinking. That’s where the name “Thinking is Power” came from. I mean, we say “Knowledge is Power,” but it’s not enough to know things. And there’s too much to know. So being able to think and be empowered to have your own agency and not fall for someone’s bunk is my goal for my students.

Eric Cross (55:07):

And doing that is gonna help them through the rest of their lives. Not be swindled, not be taken advantage of, be able to make better decisions. There’s so many benefits to building that skill. And I know your students have definitely grown and benefited. I’m sure you’ve heard, long after you’ve taught them, heard back from them and how they’ve applied that course to their lives. Melanie, thank you so much for being here. For a few things. One, for providing and filling this space where there’s such a need. Again, the critical thinking resources, the tools that you used, are so, so important. If we ever lived in a time where they were critical, it was really what we experienced during the pandemic in the last few years. We watched people’s information literacy and science literacy play out in real time. And we literally saw life-and-death decisions being made based off those skills. That highlighted, I think how important this is. And then, taking the time to generate resources for educators like myself, that we can take and adapt and put into our classroom and start teaching our students. ‘Cause like you said, by the time they get to you, they’re, they’re so far downstream or so far in a system that, depending on the teachers that they’ve had and the education system they’ve been in, may or may not have even touched on these things. They might have learned a lot of facts, but they may not have built their muscle to be able to critically analyze and interpret the world around them. And you’ve just — even the last year, it hasn’t even been a year since we talked the first time — I’ve watched your resources continue to grow, and you share them. And so I, on behalf of those of us in K–12, thank you. And thank you for being here.

Melanie Trecek-King (56:49):

Oh, well, thank you so much for this opportunity. Thank you for everything that you do, reaching out to other educators and for giving me a platform to hopefully reach other educators.

Eric Cross (57:00):

Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Melanie Trecek-King, Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College and creator of Thinking Is Power. Make sure you don’t miss any new episodes of Science Connections by subscribing to the show, wherever you get podcasts. And while you’re there, we’d really appreciate it if you can leave us a review. It’ll help more listeners to find the show. You can find more information on all of Amplify shows at our podcast hub, Amplify.com/Hub. Thanks again for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Melanie Trecek-King says about science

“Students carry in their pocket access to basically all of humanity’s knowledge at this moment in time. The question is: do they know what they’re looking for?”

– Melanie Trecek-King

Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College and creator of Thinking is Power

Meet the guest

Melanie Trecek-King is the creator of Thinking is Power, an online resource that provides critical thinking education to the general public. She is currently an associate professor of biology at Massasoit Community College, where she teaches a general-education science course designed to equip students with empowering critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy skills. An active speaker and consultant, Trecek-King loves to share her “teach skills, not facts” approach with other science educators, and help schools and organizations meet their goals through better thinking. Trecek-King is also the education director for the Mental Immunity Project and CIRCE (Cognitive Immunology Research Collaborative), which aim to advance and apply the science of mental immunity to inoculate minds against misinformation.

A woman with long blonde hair and a black top is shown in front of a blue background, framed by a circular graphic with an illustrated flask in the corner.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

S3-02: How science strengthens literacy and language development

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

In our second episode of the season, we continue finding ways that science is overlooked and how it can be better utilized in schools—and as an ally to other subjects!

We sat down with Susan Gomez Zwiep, former middle school science teacher and senior science educator and staff advocate at BSCS Science Learning. She shared past experiences and research that shows the benefits of integrating science and literacy, as well as strategies for applying these ideas in the classroom.

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (00:00):
We started to see this trend of students communicating more in English because they were excited about the science that they had been learning.

Eric Cross (00:10):
Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host Eric Cross. In this third season, we’re exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And last time around, we delved into the data showing that compared to other subjects, science is often put on the back burner. Now it’s time to explore why it’s so important to change that and how to do it effectively. So over the course of these coming episodes, we’re gonna make the case for science and equip you with data and strategies for advancing science in your own home, school, or community. To kick things off, we’re going to spend a few episodes going in depth on the integration of science and English instruction. We know we need to dramatically improve literacy rates in this country, and as we’ll show in the coming episodes, science can be a key ally in that goal. We’ll also show how language development and literacy instruction can support science. Yes, it can be a win-win, folks. To start out, I’m joined by someone who has been studying science and language development for more than a decade. Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep is a senior science educator and staff advocate for BSCS Science Learning. On this episode, she talks about her own experience as a middle school science teacher and share some key insights and strategies from the research on integrating science and English language development. Please enjoy this conversation with Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep.

Eric Cross (01:36):
Welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here and having this really important conversation. So I’m so glad you can make it, Susan.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (01:43):
Yeah, I’m excited to be here.

Eric Cross (01:44):
We’re gonna talk all about language development and science. But first I was hoping that you can just kind of set the stage and tell the listeners about yourself and how you came about to studying this specific subject.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (01:57):
Sure. So I am a California native. I grew up in the San Gabriel Valley and that’s where I started teaching. I have an undergraduate degree in integrated biology from UC Berkeley. And I thought I was gonna go be a field scientist. And while I was waiting for grad school applications to run their course, I took a substitute job in Montebello to kind of bide my time. And because I had a science degree, they asked if I would take a permanent placement, well, a temporary permanent placement. And I said sure. And found myself teaching seventh and eighth grade general science to a population that at the time was about 68% English language learners, in a school that you would consider urban, under-resourced with a community that was large percentage immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America. And I never looked back. I kept that job.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (03:04):
I loved it. I love the middle school classroom. I love teaching science to my middle school students and truly, truly just found a really good home for my love of science, but also my love for talking about science and helping other people understand science. So at some point I was entertained with the idea of going to graduate school. So while I was still teaching, I actually did a Ph.D. At the University of Southern California in the science education field. And once there, realized that I actually had a unique experience in higher ed, that experience of teaching with populations that are learning English or have home languages other than English, was actually not common in higher ed circles. And being from that community was also not common. And so I pretty quickly leveraged that experience to combat what I think is universally agreed as an equity issue that in my school where I taught, the district had advocated for ELs to get an extra hour of language development in order to promote their English language proficiency.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (04:28):
And, our principal wisely said, there are not enough English-only students in this school to do that without losing all of our science teachers because there’s not enough kids left to actually fill a day, a teacher’s day. And she said, these kids learn more language in their science courses than they do anywhere else, so I don’t wanna remove that. But the reality is, is that at that time–this was in the late nineties, early two thousands–if you were not proficient in English, you went to more time with language development. And that makes a lot of sense in some ways. But when you look at the big picture, you realize, well, that means those kids aren’t going to science and they’re not having opportunities to have consistent quality science learning opportunities simply because they spoke a language other than English at home. And so that’s really how I fell into this work.

Eric Cross (05:28):
And that has a downstream effect. I mean, once you start pulling students from a course, that automatically sets the trajectory for later outcomes, which we ultimately see in STEM fields where we, we don’t see the population of our students represented in the STEM fields. Now, I know this goes back a few years, but you were doing research for your Ph.D. What did you start to follow?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (05:50):
Yeah, so I eventually took a position at Cal State Long Beach, which was not by chance, it’s a Hispanic-serving institution, and that’s where I wanted to do my academic work. And once I was there, sought funding with a district to support elementary science learning. So it had a teacher professional learning component that was both summer and in-class, sort of like PD in the classroom component. And the district came back and said, the only way you are gonna get time to even talk about science in elementary school is if it’s attached to language development. And so that’s what we did. It was a three-year grant, there was a sister grant that followed–so all told, it was about a five-year program where we basically said, what if instead of following the traditional ELD, English Language Development curriculum, we modified and put science as the context for language development in the K2 bands.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (07:01):
Teachers at the district traditionally had not been excited about their language development curriculum until we said, we’re gonna take that and we’re gonna do some science instead. And then they were like, no, no, no! We love our ELD curriculum. But they hung in there with us. The project was successful enough that it actually became a K4 and then a K5 project. The district ended up having to put in a ton of money into this because the grant only paid for so much. But their schools actually wanted “in” ’cause what they heard is when we put science as a context for language development, kids were talking more. Kids were speaking in English more. Kids were writing more. Kids were engaged. And the ultimate, kids were developing English quickly and in a community where you could actually operate within the community without speaking English. These are Spanish-speaking communities and the schools operated in Spanish outside the classroom. So if you walked into the school’s office, the principal secretary, the person who manned the door, spoke Spanish. The field supervisors that the lunch supervisors spoke Spanish.

Eric Cross (08:17):
The non-teaching staff that are supporting the rest of the students outside of the classroom.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (08:23):
Yeah. Everybody spoke Spanish and they spoke Spanish at school. And even the principals came back and said, from being in this project, that the kids were coming into the office and had transitioned to communicating in English, especially when they wanted to talk about science, and they really wanted to talk about science ’cause they were super excited about the stuff that they were learning. So we started to see this trend of students communicating more in English because they were excited about the science that they had been learning. And yeah, that sold itself and we had schools jumping in.

Eric Cross (09:01):
So you started off in a situation where you were told that you had to, if you wanna get science and you had to merge it into English, basically. And is it fair to say that that’s because of testing requirements that schools have on them? Like this is what gets analyzed or what was the purpose behind that?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (09:15):
It was district policy and it was site policy and those policies were put into place for very good intentions. Students don’t get reclassified into English only, and reclassification is how you traditionally got access to all this other programming, electives, AP college prep, all those other things. And the best way to get them reclassified was to learn English, and to learn it sooner rather than later. So it was in an attempt to get kids reclassified from English learner to English proficient.

Eric Cross (09:55):
And then during that process it was able to be expanded to K4. And then with these open-minded teachers, you gave them the content, they used science as the context for learning. And then your students who were mostly emerging bilinguals and multilingual students, you found that they started speaking English more frequently. What did you make of that result? Like what did you come to after seeing all that happen?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (10:20):
So I do wanna say that there’s a couple of reasons why we think this works so well. But I have to really acknowledge that there were linguistics, second language acquisition experts that were part of this team. And we wouldn’t have been able to make any of this work if it was purely science educators leading this cause. There’s a lot we didn’t understand about language development, and they really helped us. But one of the things that we think is unique about science, there’s a few really important aspects–one is that we all have experiences in the natural world, since we can process outside information, right? We all have observations, things we’ve observed with our eyes, we’ve heard, we’ve felt, and all of those experiences build some pretty good science ideas before we enter formal schooling. You know, kids already have ideas about this.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (11:20):
We don’t have to give them language for it. They already have these concepts and experiences. The other thing is that we are inherently interested in the natural world we occupy. And so we’re curious, science is often considered cool, there are science channels and science fiction movies and science fiction books and magazines–and this is just … it’s just cool. And that tended to be the trigger, you know, when we gave kids something interesting to observe. A Ziploc bag with water that we added an Alka-Seltzer to, and strange things starts happening in the baggie. That curiosity, that excitement allowed kids to leap over any concerns they had about the language they were supposed to use in the classroom. One of the most difficult things about learning a language is using a language that is imperfect. So saying things and communicating in a language that you are not a hundred percent confident about, that you’re not sure you’re using the right words or the right tenses. But when kids were excited about this thing in a Ziploc bag, they didn’t care. They communicated however they could, sometimes in their primary language or their home language, sometimes in imperfect English, but by and large they just communicated. They did it in oral language, like listening and speaking, but they also did it in writing. And that was easy. Like we didn’t have to do anything other than provide interesting science experiences. And that’s, that’s pretty common.

Eric Cross (13:06):
Yeah. I feel like, to co-sign on the science is cool, it is objectively, if a matter of fact, even just looking at the Oscars, like we have multiverse, you know, we have sci-fi you know, the costume designer of Wakanda Forever. We have all of these different movies that are all founded in some kind of these scientific principles. And so the idea that science is cool and organic, naturally engaging is something I think we, we all can connect to and it resonates with all of us. So I feel like is sort of your origin story too.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (13:33):
That’s the origin story.

Eric Cross (13:34):
That’s the origin story right there, to continue with this like movie theme. Now if we fast forward to today, based on all the research that you’ve seen since then, and your experience, why would you advocate merging English language development and science?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (13:49):
Well, for one, the research that we conducted actually provided some really nice evidence that showed, even though we had essentially stole minutes from language development time and inserted science. And on state mandated tests and on their students’ language proficiency measures, the kids in the program with the blended, did significantly better than students who were getting ELD instruction alone. Traditional ELD instruction. And that kind of blew our mind. We would’ve been happy if they had done just fine. Like we could put science into a student’s day and do no harm. They could get their language development; they could get science. But in fact, what we found was that they did better. That they actually gained English more quickly and it showed up in multiple measures, including the state English language arts assessment, which again, kind of blew our mind.

Eric Cross (14:55):
So just to be clear about the study that you did, you looked at two groups and one was the blended science and English language development, and then the other one was a control group. And the blended group ended up showing more improvement.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (15:09):
Yes. So there’s quite a bit of research now, this research was done in the early two thousands, and the research has built around it to really suggest that this does seem to be a more efficient way to promote language development while still maintaining students’ access to a core content area. But in recent years, the standards have shifted and that has been just a remarkable, wonderful change. And both standards have shifted. So when we did our research, we did it under the old California Science standards that were fairly heavy in technical terms. They were heavy in science concepts rather than kids doing things. And they were a much narrower focus.

Eric Cross (16:04):
And these are the standards that most of us grew up on, right? Those of us who are pretty much teachers in the classroom today pretty much grew up on what you’re talking about. Is that fair to say?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (16:12):
That’s fair to say, yes. So the new standards that we have now, the California NGSS Standards emphasize not just ideas, but they also emphasize students doing things in science. And we didn’t have to build-in language portions to the standards. They now exist. The NGSS is a very, very rich linguistic opportunity for students. And at the same time, the way we’ve thought about language development has also shifted. We used to talk about language and science… we used to think about science as a lot of words, and you had to know the words, you had to have this technical language. And we’ve sort of shifted that to really thinking about, language is no longer a prerequisite for science learning. Language is now developed through the science learning or the content learning experiences.

Eric Cross (17:11):
So now there’s more chances to integrate English into science. Have you seen success stories or have you seen examples of this? Maybe just anecdotes of teachers kind of doing this since you’ve been doing this research and kind of watching. If so, would you mind sharing one or two?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (17:30):
Yeah. And I will just give a nod to Dr. Dr. Okie Lee who’s now at NYU who has really led sort of this reconception of language and science. And one of the ways she talks about it is this notion that I enter this learning experience, I enter this observation of this phenomena with fairly naive, simple scientific ideas. And my language about it is equally simple. But as I develop more and more ideas, as my understanding of the phenomenon, what I figured out becomes more sophisticated, I need more sophisticated language. And so what we’re starting to see are these spaces where teachers are building science ideas and science and understanding along with the language. And in order to do that, you really need to know what’s the storyline arc of my science lesson? What do they figure out in lesson one? What do they figure out in lesson two?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (18:35):
What do they figure out in lesson three? How are the science ideas building over time? So that I can then look at the language that they’re using and what language supports do I need in order to allow students to not only engage and figure things out, but communicate their ideas about it. And so we’re seeing teachers blow up what we call language, what we call text. It’s not just words. It’s not just sentences written on a paper, but it’s models, it’s pictorial representations, it’s gestures, it’s this wide range. We pretty much said, let’s blow language up. Let’s like use all of the linguistic registers that we have in order to make meaning of what we’re seeing it in together in this classroom. So that’s one thing that we’re starting to see. The other thing is that teachers are really allowing students opportunities to use what we call social language, non-standard dialects.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (19:40):
The language I use at home and with my friends. Because earlier I had said, we have all these experiences and those experiences in the world are tied up in my social register. They’re tied up in my home language ’cause that’s where I experience them. And to let students have access to using that language in the classroom, especially initially in a unit, means we’re giving ’em access to those experiences that they have that are related to the phenomena under study. So I totally understand the benefit of promoting academic language and promoting language frames and forms that we use in more academic settings. But it’s a sticky wicket. You have to be careful how you tell students about the way you want them to communicate. Because when we tell them that language that you use at home with your friends and family is not welcome here, we can send a message that they’re not welcome here. And that those experiences that they have outside of classroom about how things fall, the way sunlight heats up different surfaces, where you’ll find plants and what plants you will find based on conditions. All of those experiences, we’re sending a message that those are not welcome in the classroom. And so this expansion of language, including non-standard dialects and even home language, is really important for letting students bring their whole selves into the classroom.

Eric Cross (21:23):
I love what you just said. It legitimizes the funds of knowledge, the language, the cultures that our students are bringing to the table. I remember when I first learned the word code-switching in college and you know, I’m biracial, I grew up in my home community and my school community were two different communities and I ethnically, culturally belonged to both. And I had to code-switch in order to kind of survive and be accepted into different communities. And not until I was in college did I actually understand what I was doing. Now there were all kinds of teasing and jokes that went on to how I would talk if I code-switched improperly. And in my classroom, I would see students who would explain concepts in a way that was maybe like a casual register. They just were explaining it the best way they could.

Eric Cross (22:10):
And the way they were speaking was kind of denigrated or it was seen as negative even though they were communicating their concept. And when I became a middle school teacher, one of my, I don’t know, it’s like sometimes when you teach, you get to, you change how you were taught or what you experience and legitimizing my students’ language, and they would tell these beautiful stories and in their most common like, casual language, but they’re explaining the concept brilliantly. And it was phenomenal to see this barrier be removed of saying, you have to talk like this in order to be a scientist or you have to say these right words. And, and that’s what I feel like I’m hearing that in how you’re describing kind of how science has been done and what language can do to certain groups of students.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (22:58):
Yeah, very much so. And you know, back to the origin story, you know, I grew up in a multi-generational household. My mom, my aunt, my grandmother, Spanish was their first language, but they lost it because my mom was raised in Riverside and she, you know, went to school in the, the fifties and sixties and back then you weren’t allowed to speak Spanish at school. And so they lost the language.

Eric Cross (23:27):
They weren’t allowed to speak it at all.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (23:29):
At all. I didn’t directly observe it, but that is the story that my family tells, that there was no English spoken anywhere on school grounds. And that was a different issue. Right? That was very much for people unfamiliar with some of the history in Southern California. Their segregated schools, severe racism, linguistic racism, racial racism against Mexicans was a real thing. But yet I grew up in this household where the sort of way of speaking, like I think many Mexican households, the context is everything. So you can’t get to the facts until you’ve told the whole context of everything happening around it. So we used to joke that we couldn’t send my grandmother to the doctor by herself ’cause he had 15 minutes, and she was gonna take 20 just to tell him how she got there before she got to why she was there. But this telling of the context, the telling of the story around the idea is part of the linguistic, this sort of linguistic way of my household. When I got to school, I had to learn to drop it because teachers found me off topic. You know, I still have to be careful how I express things and sometimes I’m not a fast storyteller <laugh>, and I monitor that for myself. So I can only imagine what it’s like to be a kid in a classroom.

Eric Cross (24:59):
Right. And there are so many constraints in the school day, you know, especially if you’re multi-subject and you’re elementary and you’re teaching multiple subjects and someone’s trying to tell a story and you’re just like, land the plane! And they’ve, you know, gotta tell ’em the story, but realizing that when you look at it through a lens of like, culturally, this is how we communicate, then it reframes what the student is trying to do. They’re communicating to you based on how they’ve learned to communicate and they’re including essential parts of the story. And so how do you both honor that while also, you know, certain things like brevity and being concise and things like that that they’ll have to learn. But also honoring that and making sure that there’s space for that in your classroom. Even me, I’m thinking about this where I had students record this video and it was one minute to two-and-a-half minutes explaining three concepts. And I had students coming up to me afterwards saying, Mr. Cross, I need to record two videos because two-and-a-half minutes is not long enough. And I was like, how? I even extended it. But I’m realizing and listening to you and going, they’re probably not just getting to the point. They’re probably including more context into this because that’s how they story tell and that was actually part of the lesson.

Eric Cross (26:12):
So now I need to go back and extend their time that I’ve given them for <laugh> that project. I wanna come back to kind of, since we’re on this topic about why this is also an equity issue. Mm-hmm. <affirmative>. So we were talking about language, you touched on this a bit, and we were talking about integrating into science, but can we go a little bit further into how this integrated approach maybe can benefit English language learners in particular? And maybe anything else that’s related to equity that comes to mind.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (26:40):
So there’s a couple of layers of the equity issue. The most tangible and clear is student access. If we wait until students develop English proficiency to allow them access to quality science learning, we lose a tremendous number of students that could not only could they benefit from science, we could benefit from their entering this science conversation. And I was at a university and I was in a college of natural sciences and we were dedicated to increasing the diversity of the faculty. And it was a struggle ’cause the number of Ph.D. science ed or biology or chemistry academics that come from marginalized populations is very, very small. And it’s not by accident. You know, the number of students that make it into the next level, that make it into college prep courses, that make it into STEM majors, that complete STEM majors and go on to either careers or advanced degrees narrows at every possible step.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (28:01):
And so the equity issue is really one of access. And as basic as that is, it’s the easiest to solve. So that’s the first layer of equity. But the second issue around equity is how we engage these students once they’re in this space. Do we make it possible for them to see themselves as a scientist or an engineer? Are we creating learning experiences that not only allow them to use all the sense-making resources that they have, but do we make them feel like they’re valuable and useful in that space? Because there’s a lot of people that will say, I could be successful as a scientist, but I’m not willing to give up who I am in order to do that. And that’s a real thing. There’s a lot of research about like, why are they leaving? Like why, you know, is it because they’re not able?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (29:05):
Is it because they don’t see themselves as being capable? And now I think we’re looking at this as a different issue. It’s not that students don’t see themselves as capable and not that they’re not achieving. They see the cost that it will take to enter these fields and essentially not be able to be their full selves. So that’s the second equity issue. And in both cases we lose. As a society, we lose. We lose access to the full range of human resources that we have, and we lose access to their unique perspectives that they would bring to real problems facing us. It’s like all hands-on deck. We need to stop making it too difficult to participate in the conversation and we need to be more inclusive about how we invite these other perspectives and how we respect and utilize their ways of sense-making. That may not be Western science ways that we have in our books now, but hopefully those science materials are gonna change and we’re gonna start to see other ways of sense-making and other people involved in the stories that we tell around science concepts.

Eric Cross (30:29):
And just to be clear, this practice in integration, while it lifts up equity for marginalized or underrepresented groups or students who are emerging bilinguals or students who typically we don’t see representation of, this approach also benefits native speakers as well. Correct?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (30:47):
Yeah. And there’s actually a group of native speakers that come from text poor homes. It’s typical in underserved communities. Poor people living in poverty that may be native English speakers. They may not be marginalized populations. But they don’t have access to like text. And so that’s another group altogether that needs linguistic support. And then once you have all voices in the room contributing, everybody benefits because now the conversation, the building understanding conversation we’re having or the sense-making conversation that we’re having has everybody involved. And we all benefit from that.

Eric Cross (31:33):
And we see, I think one of the benefits about a country like the U.S., is we have such a heterogeneous group of people. And when we’re moving in the same direction, we’re all coming to the same problem, but from different perspectives and we’re able to come up with more innovative and novel solutions to them. And that’s kind of what I’m hearing is like as we generate scientists that are all coming from different backgrounds, we’re gonna be able to solve future problems, current problems a lot more effectively because nobody has a monopoly on perspective. Nobody has a monopoly on knowledge or the fastest way to do something or the best way to do something.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (32:11):
Right. Right. And traditionally we really have privileged particular experiences, particular ways of sense-making particular linguistic registers. And if we could just kind of put that privileged ways aside and open up space for everybody to feel like they have a voice, I think the next generation could change the world. I think they could solve some real problems. I’m truly hopeful that they would see themselves not just as capable, but as necessary in these pursuits.

Eric Cross (32:50):
So what does it actually look like today to do this work in instruction well? So to integrate the science, to integrate literacy, to take the benefits of the things that we’ve been talking about. What are some practical things that educators could do to get started, whether it’s in early, you know, K5 or middle school or even high school.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (33:13):
So I will say, I’m gonna kind of separate ’cause in the elementary space, students are primarily developing literacy in multiple languages. The language of the classroom, typically English, home language, languages, they may be multilingual. In the secondary setting where students tend to have developed social language in some language, it’s a little different. So I’m gonna kind of separate those two. So for elementary spaces where teachers tend to teach multiple things, I recommend that you get a partner. Don’t do this work alone. You cannot do this work alone. I mean you can, but it’s very frustrating and not nearly as much fun. So you really wanna take a look at what is the science that kids are going to be engaged in. Because when we look at science first and build language development around it, the experience tends to be more authentic and organic.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (34:18):
And what we used to do is we used to, like when we were talking about the science, we’d monitor the language we were using and then use that to say these are the registers. This is the language that we use when we were thinking about this. So if students are gonna use this, these are the scaffolds they’re gonna need. ‘Cause to do it, well, to do it efficiently, the scaffolds need to be specific to the science learning. So if we’re doing cause and effect, those are specific linguistic scaffolds that are different than if, say we’re doing model and systems and systems models, those are a whole other slew of scaffolds. And so you wanna be really tending to, what is the science being discussed and what is the language that kids are going to use and build scaffolds around it.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (35:10):
And then you also wanna think about what is the social language? What are the experience that kids will have either in words or pictures that I can leverage in this space. And then you wanna do that for the arc of the unit and slowly increase sophistication around those linguistic supports, as well as the science learning. But if kids have social language and they’re now in, there’s a group we call long-term English learners who have not been reclassified way beyond what the typical reclassification is. And that actually is important to think about because if you think about the kinder group, the group of kindergartners that enter a school when they’re five or six, those kids are going to go from grade to grade to grade. And as students develop proficiency, will get reclassified and they move out of this group that we’re still calling English learners.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (36:10):
So by the time you get to like seventh, eighth, ninth grade, if they’re still students in that category, they have very different needs on average than the group we started with. Often when we talk about secondary or these long-term English learners, we can leverage social language a lot more, but have to build the scaffolds more carefully around, for lack of a better word, the more academic content transferring that those social nonverbal language into more sophisticated forms. I think in any setting, you wanna utilize your resources. If I’m in a secondary space and I have a language development teacher and I’m not talking to her or him or they, that’s a problem. You need to go talk to the other people that have these same kids and talk to them about, how are you engaging in language, what are you doing?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (37:07):
Because you know, you could actually have a lesson, maybe this is a lesson about energy and you’re using a model and the kids are creating an initial model. And over in ELD land, they’re doing some linguistic supports. They’re working on some forms and functions of language. You could talk about the catapult, you could talk about the solar heater. You could use the context of the science conversation, which has a whole bunch of tangible experiences. You know, there’s the solar heater in front of you. I don’t need to keep it all in my head ’cause it’s in front of me and we can point to things and talk about things by manipulating the materials. And then I can take all of that and my ELD partner can use that as context when available. But it takes collaboration, but it’s collaboration well spent. And it’s more challenging in the initial phases of the collaboration. Once you kind of the get into the groove, it becomes a lot easier.

Eric Cross (38:16):
The meta of this, as we talk about integrating science and literacy is, and this is great advice, but it’s basically integrate your science teachers with your English teachers and co-plan and do this work together. It’s a force multiplier. One, you’re both, you’re getting two specialists together. It also, I’m just listening to just the parallels. It also resembles what you actually do in the STEM fields of collaboration working together to problem-solve, and you’re modeling for your students what you want to happen. And if I was an administrator listening to this, someone who had control, like master schedules and things like that, there also needs to be space created for these teachers to talk to each other and plan and do all these other things to kind of maybe come up with like interdisciplinary units or even just meet and begin the conversation. It just seems like such great advice.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (39:07):
Yeah. We’re professionals. We have academic degrees and credentials and experience in the classroom and yet more often than not, we leave it to the students in the seats to make the connections between my class and the class they go to next. And that’s not fair. We need to be talking to each other. So if we’re talking about argumentation, argumentation in science and argumentation in ELA and argumentation in math–we’re not even talking about the same thing. I mean, cognitively we’re talking about taking some evidence and creating a claim and supporting it, but what we mean by evidence is very different in the different disciplines. What counts as more convincing evidence changes. And yet we assume that because we say evidence in one class, the kids know what we’re talking about. And the kids are sitting there going, which one is this? Which evidence are you talking about? Because last period it was something else. And so I think we also need to really consider who’s in the best position to clarify the connections and the integration because we leave it to kids more often than not right now.

Eric Cross (40:19):
I agree. Just having those conversations and defining your terms and agreeing on them just to make it easier for students. ‘Cause you’re right, they are left to make those connections or bridge the gaps. And when you have an education system for many schools, I think most of us, it’s still pretty siloed. You’re still kind of like, especially when you’re in secondary, it’s we’re doing this or even elementary, different times of the day you do different subjects, versus the way that we experience life itself or even our professions. We’re actually integrating science and math and reading and writing throughout the day, and ebbs and flows going back and forth. And without making those explicit connections, we’re leaving a lot of things to chance, hoping that the learning’s there in such a valuable moment. Before we go, I’m wondering if you have a parting message for listeners about the topic of integrating science and literacy. You’ve already said so many amazing things, but you have the platform speaking to educators and folks out there. What would you wanna say to them?

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (41:18):
This is not an easy endeavor. The system that we operate in does not make this effort easy, but it is worth it. It is worth it to the kids in our classrooms. It is worth it to the building of a scientific community and a scientifically literate populace. It’s important to solving problems in the future. It’s important to have kids feel like regardless of how they say things, that they belong in a classroom. If we can relax the sort of linguistic demands on kids and let them enter science learning in a way that allows them to use all their resources and they’re curious, they can really leverage both areas in a way that they don’t do individually. It’s really hard to think about what it is I’m trying to say if I’m worried about how I have to say it. And so we really need to think about, when are those times that we’re gonna let kids just tell us what it is that they’re excited about and when is it that we’re going to help them craft a more formalized language around those ideas. Right now we do a really good job at that second half. We need to do better at the first.

Eric Cross (42:46):
Susan, thank you so much for joining us today and for sharing your expertise and your wisdom and your passion for serving the students and for bringing everybody to the table through language and through science. We really appreciate it and the listeners will too.

Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep (43:03):
Thank you so much. This is my favorite topic.

Eric Cross (43:06):
Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep, senior science educator and staff advocate at BSCS Science Learning. And please remember to subscribe to Science Connections so that you don’t miss any of the episodes in this exciting third season. And while you’re there, we’d really appreciate it if you can leave us a review. It’ll help more listeners find the show. Next time on the show, we’re going to continue exploring the how and why of integrating science and literacy instruction.

Speaker 3 (43:35):
When we interview scientists, they spend a lot of their time reading the work of other scientists and writing their findings, writing grant proposals, presenting at conferences. A huge part of the work of a scientist is not just at a bench conducting experiments, but even if you’re conducting experiments, you’re using your literacy processes to think about what you’re seeing in your experiment.

Eric Cross (43:57):
That’s next time on Science Connections. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep says about science

“When we used science as a context for language development, kids were talking more, kids were writing more, kids were engaged.”

– Dr. Susan Gomez Zwiep

Senior Science Educator, BSCS Science Learning

Meet the guests

Susan Gomez Zwiep began her career in science education as a middle school science teacher in Los Angeles where she spent over 12 years working in urban schools. Prior to joining BSCS, Susan worked at California State University, Long Beach as a Professor of Science Education.

Susan has also worked as a Regional Director for the K-12 Alliance, providing high-quality professional development in science and mathematics for K12 educators, including the CA NGSS Early Implementer Initiative. Susan consistently works toward establishing equitable access for all students to rigorous, inquiry-based science instruction and supporting teachers in their journey to become advocates for students, science education, and their own professional development.

A person with short dark hair smiles at the camera outdoors, with trees and hills in the background. The photo is framed by a circular graphic with a star and an accent mark.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

S3-01: Science as the underdog, and the research behind it

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

Get ready for season 3 of Science Connections: The Podcast!

In our first episode, we unpack the research around our season theme of science as the underdog with Horizon Research, Inc. Vice President Eric R. Banilower and  Senior Researcher Courtney Plumley. Eric and Courtney dive into the research they’ve found and their experiences as former educators to show how science is often overlooked in K–12 classrooms. We discuss how the science classroom compares to other subjects in terms of time and resources, how schools are a reflection of society, and what’s needed to change science and its impact on a larger scale.

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Courtney Plumley (00:00):

We asked teachers how much science, professional development, they’ve had in the last three years, and nearly half of elementary teachers said none.

Eric Cross (00:10):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. I am super-excited to be kicking off the third season with the show. This entire season will be exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And we’re gonna make the case for science, by showing how and why it can be used more effectively. In the coming episodes, we’re gonna talk about how science can be better integrated into other content areas like literacy and math, and explore some of the benefits that you might not be thinking about good science instruction. But first, science as the underdog. I bet some of you out there feel like science is the underdog in your community at school. I know I have at times. To kick off this season, I’m gonna talk to two people who really studied this question by looking at the state of science instruction across the US. Eric Banilower is Vice President of Horizon Research and Courtney Plumley is Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. Eric was the principal investigator and Courtney an author of the latest in a series of studies called “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” We’re gonna dive into the findings of their most recent report to see what the data’s showing us. Please enjoy my discussion with Eric Banilower and Courtney Plumley. Courtney, hello. And thank you so much for joining us.

Courtney Plumley (01:25):

Hi Eric. It’s nice to be here.

Eric Cross (01:26):

And Eric, welcome.

Eric R. Banilower (01:27):

We’re thrilled to be here, so thank you for having us.

Eric Cross (01:30):

I was reading through the report. Four hundred…a very thorough report, 471 pages, I think, as I got it?

Eric R. Banilower (01:37):

And that’s only one of the many reports from that study.

Eric Cross (01:40):

Yeah. You all have done your work, so I’m really excited to to talk to you about this. And on this season of the show, we’re exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And I think a lot of our listeners, we feel like science is an underdog either in their school or in their district. But you’ve actually done some research on this, in a 2018 study, “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” So I wanna talk about this report. But first I was hoping you can kind of set the stage. How did you come to work on this report, and then, big picture, what were you hoping to find out?

Eric R. Banilower (02:10):

So the 2018 study that you just mentioned was actually the sixth iteration of a series of studies dating back to 1977. And we collect data every decade or so—you know, plus or minus a few years. And really, what we’re trying to do is get a snapshot of what the science and math education system looks like in in the nation. So my role grew. I started working at Horizon in about 1998, after teaching high school for five years in California. And then going to graduate school. And right about that time, the company was doing the 2000 iteration of the survey. And I worked on it with the team here at Horizon. And then we did it again in 2012. And I had a much more prominent role in that study, and became the kind of leader of the study. And in 2018, the most recent version, we just did it again. So the goal of this study is really to kind of examine key aspects of the K–12 STEM education system. And the main audience of the work has traditionally been policy makers, researchers, and practitioners who work at the federal, state, and district level.

Eric Cross (03:30):

So this study, you took kind of a sample size, but it’s reflective of trends that we tend to see across the nation as a whole. Would that be fair to say?

Eric R. Banilower (03:38):

Yes, definitely it is. It is a random sample of schools in the country. So we start with a list of all the public and private schools in the nation, and then do a random sample of those schools, and then work really, really hard to recruit schools to agree to be in the study. And that has gotten harder every time we’ve done the study, for many understandable reasons. And then once we have schools on board, we sample teachers within schools. So we don’t even survey every teacher in a school. It’s really a sub-sample. So that we can make inferences about the nation as a whole.

Eric Cross (04:14):

Makes sense. And so Courtney, what did you find out about the time spent on science instruction in US schools?

Courtney Plumley (04:22):

So, I’m gonna talk about elementary teachers to begin with.

Eric Cross (04:26):

Because that was your past life, right?

Courtney Plumley (04:28):

I am a former elementary teacher, yeah. So that’s kind of where my head is. And that’s relatable for me. Right? So we asked teachers, like, how many days of the week or weeks of the year that they teach elementary school. And fewer than 20% teach science every day of the school year. They kind of do one or two things, for the most part. They teach a couple days a week or they teach every day of the week, but only for, like, maybe six weeks, and then they swap with social studies and they kind of do that across the school year. Which is really different from, like, math, right? We also asked elementary teachers, how often do they teach math, and it’s every day of the year. Then we also asked them how many minutes they teach when they’re teaching, and we kind of did the math to figure out, all right, if they taught science every day of the school year, how many minutes would it be in a single day, so that we could make a more comparable comparison with math and ELA. If you were to work it out, how many minutes of science an elementary teacher teaches across the year, and break it down to per day, it’s like 18 minutes for the lower elementary grades, 27 for the upper elementary grades. Which is not a lot. But it’s pretty much an hour a day in math, and 80 plus minutes in ELA. So, a lot less. And then, you know, when I was teaching, the first thing to go was always science, right? If there was an assembly, if there was early release or whatever, that was the first thing to go. So those numbers might even be higher. Just because they aren’t factoring that kind of thing in, too.

Eric Cross (06:05):

So, now I’m curious. That is something that I’ve seen just anecdotally, science being the first thing to go. I feel like I’ve seen that almost…it’s almost become a meme, that I’ve heard that so often. Just in your experience, why do you think that is that huge disparity between the two?

Courtney Plumley (06:26):

Well, I mean, when I was teaching, I was teaching third grade. I had an end-of-grade test in math and ELA for my kids. I didn’t have one in science. So the administration said, “Hey, if you’re gonna drop something, drop something that’s not tested.”

Eric Cross (06:41):

Simple as that. And Eric, you, past life: physics teacher. High school. What did you see? ‘Cause our listeners run the gamut from elementary all the way up to high school. What did you see, as far as relative science instruction in the secondary level?

Eric R. Banilower (07:00):

Sure. You know, secondary is just a whole different situation than elementary. Rght? Because you have departmentalization. I taught science. I didn’t have to teach other subjects. And students had periods, and they still do, sorry, they still have periods, even though it’s been a long time since I taught. And you know, they rotate from one class to another. So all the classes were essentially the same length. So, you know, when I was teaching, it was about 50-minute periods. So in terms of minutes of a class or minutes on a subject, it’s not really different. But what is different is what students are required to take in order to graduate high school. One of the things we asked schools about in this study was how many years of a subject do students have to take in order to graduate? And what we saw was in mathematics, over half the schools in the nation require students to take four years of mathematics to graduate. OK? And the vast majority of the rest, about 44%, require three years in science. Most schools require three years. Very few require four years. And many, or a fair number, still only require two years to graduate. So the expectation of what students are taking is lower in science than it is in mathematics.

Eric Cross (08:20):

So you were seeing the same trend in secondary, essentially.

Eric R. Banilower (08:24):

Yes.

Eric Cross (08:24):

The amount of time devoted to the instruction of science…we’re kind of seeing it mirrored just across K–12 across the board.

Eric R. Banilower (08:33):

That’s correct.

Eric Cross (08:34):

And that’s across the country. ‘Cause the sample size represents teachers from Alaska, Hawaii, the South, SoCal, everywhere. So what’s been the reaction to that number? Like 18 to 20 minutes is…I mean, it’s, it’s half of my lunch at our school. What’s been the reaction to that number since this data has been published?

Eric R. Banilower (08:58):

I don’t know, Courtney, if you want to take that…

Courtney Plumley (09:00):

It’s a lot of what you just did. Like, what??? Like, how is it possible to teach all the things you need to teach in such a little amount of time?

Eric R. Banilower (09:08):

What’s really kind of surprising to me, though — though now that I’ve worked on three iterations of the study, it no longer surprises me, but it did at first — is that these numbers really aren’t changing since we’ve started doing this study. You know, people thought maybe with No Child Left Behind and the increase in accountability, time on science might actually go down, because there was more testing in math and English Language Arts. It didn’t happen. It was pretty much constant, that this has been kind of the state of science education for a long time.

Eric Cross (09:44):

So Eric, if I’m hearing you right: The past studies, we’re not seeing an increase or a decline. This has been this way for how many years, roughly, would you say? Since it’s been studied?

Eric R. Banilower (09:54):

You know, I’d have to go back to the 1977 report to get the numbers, but I’m gonna say since then, it has not changed much, if at all.

Eric Cross (10:03):

So this has kind of been entrenched. This has been the norm for almost for the career of a teacher, almost generationally. We’re looking at anyone who’s been in the highest levels of leadership to someone just entering the classroom, this has been the way it’s always been. This is kind of for many people what they’ve only known.

Eric R. Banilower (10:20):

Right.

Eric Cross (10:21):

Kind of become the norm.

Courtney Plumley (10:21):

We didn’t even have science when I was in elementary school. We had science on a cart that came by, you know, every other week.

Eric Cross (10:28):

Was that like a food truck, but like the science version of it? It shows up and does quick science and takes off?

Courtney Plumley (10:35):

And New York was, I mean — we always watched Voyage of the Mimi. I don’t know if you ever watched that. But that’s what we watched every single time the Science on the Cart came. So it’s like a marine biology show. Ben Affleck was on it when he was a kid.

Eric Cross (10:48):

<laugh> Really? For me it was, Mr. Wizard. For some of my students, even now, Bill Nye. You know, the Bill Nye show or something would come on. So what happens when you look at less wealthy districts? Is there a relationship between community resources and science instruction, or is it pretty much equal no matter what the district resources are, the school’s resources are? Did you see any data there?

Eric R. Banilower (11:12):

Yes. We actually did a lot of disaggregating the data by community type, student demographics in the schools, to look to see whether there were areas of inequities across the country. And, you know, one of the factors we looked at was kind of a measure of socioeconomic status. You know, wealth in the community. By looking at percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. And interestingly, in terms of time on science instruction, there is actually not a relationship between income level and how much time is spent at the elementary level on science, which actually surprised us.

Eric Cross (11:54):

Because you might have expected it to be the other way now. And granted, it’s 18 to 20 minutes, there isn’t much more to shave off off of that. But were there other differences, like when you compared those communities? Maybe it wasn’t the amount of science instruction, but was there anything else, like teacher preparedness, resources? Were there anything else that you did see discrepancies in? Or was it equal across the board?

Eric R. Banilower (12:13):

No, unfortunately there, there have been, and still are, a number of areas where community resources are related to pretty substantial differences in educational opportunities that students have. So, you know, we’re talking about the high school science requirements. One of the things that we saw was that high schools in less wealthy communities tend to offer less rigorous science courses than high schools in better-off-financially communities. So they may not be AP courses or second year advanced courses to the same extent that there are in the wealthier communities. That’s one big difference that we saw. Another one was what you were just saying about, sort of, the teachers who teach in these communities. You know, I think that for many years people have had a feeling that the best teachers go to the better off schools because it’s easier to teach there. Well, we see that the schools with the most poverty, they tend to have the newer teachers, who are just starting their career. They tend to have teachers who are less well prepared to teach their subject. And there’s a host of other differences we found. And you know, you mentioned the report being 400 pages. This other report that looks at these differences is also quite long, and, you know, identified a number of areas where there are these disparities in the system.

Eric Cross (13:43):

Well, we appreciate you synthesizing this for us, because this is super-important. And you’ve fleshed out a lot of things. And the fact that it’s driven by data, we as science teachers, we as scientists, being objective, really, really value that. Because this is actually validating a lot of the things that our listeners and myself, we experience anecdotally. But you don’t have a lot of things to network you. And sometimes, when you see this, you wonder if it’s just you, or is are other people experiencing this? And so as you start talking about this data, realizing, oh wow, this is not something in isolation. This is systemic. This is something that’s impacted. And then Eric, what you said about schools that were lower-income, that were under-resourced, and didn’t offer those advanced classes, what are some of the impacts of that, maybe downstream, of doing that? Not having those AP classes? I just kind of wanted to put that out there and ask you.

Eric R. Banilower (14:31):

You know, this is a really…this is a current debate right now, about what the goals of schooling K–12 should be. You know, are all kids meant to go to college? Should there be alternative paths? And you know, I know when I was teaching, I would have students say, “Why do I need to know this? I’m not gonna go into science. I’m not gonna study physics. Why do I need to take this?” And, you know, the answer I used to give them was, “You never know where your life is gonna end up and what opportunities you’ll have. And by having these educational experiences, you have more opportunities available to you. Whether or not you choose to go down those paths, you have opportunities. And when you don’t take this kind of coursework, you know, even if you don’t want to go to college, you limit your potential careers. Because so many careers nowadays require some technical knowledge, some knowledge of science, even if it’s not explicitly a science job. It is embedded in our society now. We are a technological and science-based society.”

Eric Cross (15:37):

It reminds me of something that I’ve told my students, that if you become a scientist, that’s awesome. I love that. But if you don’t, and you want to be a dancer or an actor or a lawyer or anything that may not be directly related to STEM, I want you to choose it because it was a choice, and not a lack of options. So as long as you’re choosing not to go in STEM, and you don’t make that decision because you can’t, or because you weren’t given the opportunity. So that’s how I’ve always had this mindset as a teacher. And I’ve explained it to my students. So if you say, “Cross, you know what I want to do, I wanna be an awesome chef,” which, you know, low-key that’s science, right? <laugh> Molecular gastronomy, we know that. But like, you be the best chef. But as long as you’re being a chef because you choose that, and you’re like, “I love science, but I don’t wanna go that direction,” we’re good.

Eric R. Banilower (16:26):

Right. And if you think about, a lot of social justice issues with pollution and climate change, and you look at which communities are more affected by some of these larger environmental problems and challenges, it tends to be the lower socioeconomic communities, the more poverty-stricken communities have worse water, have worse air quality. And so if, if people from these communities are going to make informed decisions about who they’re gonna vote for, about what policies they’re gonna support, those are science topics that you have to have some understanding in order to make informed decisions in your life.

Eric Cross (17:09):

Courtney, you were one of the Swiss Army Knife teachers. This is how I perceive it for elementary. You had to teach everything. And shout out to all of my elementary school teachers that have to be mathematicians and grammar whizzes and scientists and PE instructors and social emotional, all of those different things. you also looked at teacher preparedness. How did teachers feel about teaching science compared to other subjects like language arts and math? Did you see anything there?

Courtney Plumley (17:39):

We did, we did. And I’m glad you said, “How did they feel about it?” Because one thing that, you know, in a survey you can’t really do is capture how someone actually…how good someone actually…the quality of someone’s instruction. But you can ask them how prepared they feel. And you can even ask them like stats, like, “What did you major in in college?” You know. But you really are going on based on what what they say. So we ask them how prepared they feel to teach all the core subjects. And two-thirds of elementary teachers felt very well prepared to teach reading. They felt very well prepared to teach math. But when it comes to science, it’s less than a third felt very well prepared. And you know, like you said, when you’re teaching elementary school, you’re teaching all the subjects. But also in science, there’s usually four main instructional units in a school year. And they’re all from different science disciplines. So not only are you going on, like, “Maybe in college took a lot of bio classes, but I didn’t take any physics classes, and now I have to teach physics to my kids and I have no experience there.” So, you know, we also ask them how well-prepared they felt in these different disciplines. And the numbers are even smaller, you know. Fewer than a quarter felt very well-prepared in life science. And like 13% felt very well-prepared in physical science. So there’s definitely a big difference between how much teachers feel prepared for ELA and math versus science.

Eric Cross (19:08):

And just from a human perspective, when we don’t feel prepared for something, we’re not really gonna probably lean into it as much as we are into our strengths. Like, that’s just kind of how we are across the board.

Courtney Plumley (19:18):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (19:18):

I’m even like that with my own chores in the house. Or when I have things I need to get done, and I might not be as good at doing those things—it’s gonna be a heavy cognitive load; I’m gonna have to do some background research—I tend to find other areas to excel in. Like, I’m gonna be productive in this other area. I’m gonna really crush it here. But this other thing gets put to the back burner.

Courtney Plumley (19:36):

Totally. And the same reason I might skip science today, <laugh> ’cause it’s scary.

Eric Cross (19:41):

Yeah, exactly. But I love this book. <Laugh> Or we could do this math, and let’s really, really dive deep into it. Now, did you also look at professional development and instructional resources that are being provided?

Courtney Plumley (19:53):

We did.

Eric Cross (19:54):

And on the whole, how was the amount—and I’m seeing a trend here, so I’m kind of feeling like I know where this might go—but I wanted to ask it, did the amount of professional development and resources for science, was there much of a difference between that and other subjects?

Eric R. Banilower (20:10):

Well, I’ll start on this, and Courtney, feel free to jump in. You know, one of the things that we asked was how much kind of discretionary funding do schools devote to science and how much to mathematics? So, for consumables or equipment and supplies or computer software for teachers to use in the classroom. And it’s hard to compare, I think, across subjects because the demands for this kind of supplies, et cetera, is very different, I think, in science than it is in mathematics. Right? We have a lot of, you know, equipment for doing investigations, consumable supplies in science. And those things need to be replenished on a regular basis. It turns out, when we look at the data for school discretionary spending on this kind of stuff, the median school spends less than $2 per student at the elementary level on science, compared to over $6 for mathematics. At the high school level, it’s kind of reversed. Schools spend more money on high school science than they do on high school math. but even still, at the high school, it’s less than $7 per student. Which is not a lot of money being devoted to thinking about all the materials, supplies, chemicals, et cetera, that you need to teach science well, at the high school level. More disturbing is the fact that, you know, we were talking about inequities before, schools that serve less well-off communities spend less than schools that serve wealthier communities, by quite a big amount.

Eric Cross (21:46):

So essentially the per-student thing just kind of popped out to me: So, like, an expensive Starbucks drink is what we’re spending on science per student.

Eric R. Banilower (21:57):

At the high school level. Yes.

Eric Cross (21:58):

At the high school level. And I get those catalogs in the mail, from all of those big science companies. You can’t get much for seven bucks. At least, nothing high-level. And I know I do a lot of 99-cent store science. I go down the street, go to the 99-cent store. Thankfully we could do a lot of awesome science with just, you know, cheap things. But a lot of the higher level experiences, they’re pricey. But the experiences are so rich! And $7 at the high school level is nothing. It’s not much at all.

Eric R. Banilower (22:28):

Yeah. It is definitely, you know, kind of shocking to think about what we’re investing in our children’s future.

Eric Cross (22:37):

Now, just to put you both on the spot, ’cause I feel like that we’ve identified some…we’re seeing a trend here, we’re seeing a pattern. We’re talking about, you know, being science teachers. There’s a pattern going on here. Do you think it’s fair to characterize science as the underdog?

Courtney Plumley (22:52):

I think in elementary school, it is a fair statement. Because, like we said before, I mean they’re gonna preference math and ELA almost all the time. I mean, the other thing you’d asked a little bit ago was about professional development, too. And we do have some data on that. And we ask teachers, you know, how much science professional development they’ve had in the last three years. And nearly half of elementary teachers said none. And I know I didn’t have any science professional development. If I was gonna pick from among the catalog, I was picking one that I needed more, like math. Math and ELA. I keep making that statement, but just over and over, it’s the truth.

Eric Cross (23:31):

And going back to what you said earlier, because that’s where the accountability was, right? And that kind of came top-down.

Courtney Plumley (23:38):

Yes.

Eric Cross (23:38):

And influenced everything else.

Eric R. Banilower (23:40):

Yeah. Now, really interesting thing that we did, a year or so ago, ’cause someone asked us, you know, “Hey, could you look at this?” is we compared elementary science instructional time among states where science counted towards accountability versus states where science doesn’t count towards accountability. And at the upper elementary grades, more time was spent on science in schools in states where they had science accountability. Now I’m not arguing for adding science to accountability systems. But that’s a pretty telling piece of data.

Eric Cross (24:19):

What gets measured gets done.

Eric R. Banilower (24:20):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (24:20):

Or what was getting evaluated was getting done. And that raises, that opens up a myriad of other questions about testing, and what that reveals, and all of those different things. But at the end of the day, what you’re finding is that the things that were getting tested were the things that were getting the priority.

Eric R. Banilower (24:36):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (24:37):

How did we get to this point? And Eric, you said it goes back at least to ’77, but we look at society and we’re…I wanna say we’re post-pandemic, but we’re we’re not. but we’re trying to, we’re trying to get past that. But we’re looking at…we had innovations in biology, we have innovations right now in green energy and electric cars and all of these things that are STEM-based. We know that these are things that have moved humanity forward. And we look at the pipeline of people who are in STEM and we, we see the disparities and things like that. Why was science given less of a priority? I’m just curious. Maybe, Courtney, we could start with you, if you have any ideas. Or Eric. Either one. But how did we get here?

Eric R. Banilower (25:22):

<laugh> I think Courtney wants me to take that one. I’m older so I’ve seen more <laugh>. So, you know, I have the gray hair. She doesn’t. I think it’s complicated. And I know this sounds cliche, but but schools are a reflection of society, right? And, and so science education, you know, if you think back when Sputnik was launched, there became this great demand in America to improve and produce more scientists and engineers in response to this Cold War threat. Right? And then in the ’80s there was rising, oh, the gathering storm was an economic argument that we needed to increase science and math, you know, education and people going into those fields in order to compete economically against the global competitors. And I think that America has always produced a fair number, a large number, of high-quality scientists and engineers, you know. And we still lead the world in many ways. But where we’ve identified as a problem is who has those opportunities to go into those fields. You know, it used to be a very select, a very male-dominated, white male-dominated field. Right? And other people didn’t have the opportunity, or they were shown the way out pretty early. And we, I think, have come to realize as a country that, you know, the, the greater the diversity of thought that we can get into these discussions, the more innovative we can be and the more productive as a society we can be. And so I think we’ve had this shift in the country to, instead of thinking about just the quality for the select few, but to be thinking about the quality for everyone. And so that makes it seem like some of these challenges are greater than they used to be. And I think they’re different challenges, right? We’ve evolved as a society and I think schools have evolved.

Eric Cross (27:40):

There is a conversation I was in on a plane with a person who was a materials manager for a company that made the adhesive for sandpaper. And we were flying…I was flying to Denmark and he was flying to some other Scandinavian country. And we were just talking about it. And he came from another industry, and somehow the conversation led to science. I don’t know how that happened. But somehow I just started talking about science and I asked him about, Eric, kind of what you said about the US kind of leading the way in science innovation versus the rest of the world. And I asked him why. And he said one of the reasons why is because the heterogeneous thought. The different groups of people that are coming to a problem actually create more innovative and novel solutions. Versus when it’s more homogeneous. And everyone’s either culturally or just for whatever reason, kind of thinks a certain way. While they might have a more efficient way, the variety of solutions are not as varied and not as novel. I was reminded of that story based on what you just said. So it’s really interesting. So it seems to be that it benefits if we have more heterogeneous groups, more folks who are contributing to STEM, because that’s gonna be solving the next problem more efficiently. Or I guess maybe in my head it seems like the next we need…we do really well when we have a dragon to slay. I mean, it seems like we come together when that’s the case, right? Like, I dunno.

Eric R. Banilower (29:06):

No, I think that’s…I think that’s accurate.

Eric Cross (29:09):

Later on the season of the podcast, we’re gonna explore ways to better integrate science with other subjects like literacy and math. Were you able to study at all any more integrated approaches to science instruction? Does any of your research support that approach?

Courtney Plumley (29:25):

Not on the national survey, we didn’t study that. And it’s something that we’ve talked about before, because it’s difficult to get teachers to…we were talking about instructional time. It’s hard for teachers to put a number on it when they’re integrating, because, you know, it’s not like I have my science block from 3 to 3:30 anymore. Now it’s kind of scattered about. But it’s something that has been in the ether. We’ve been looking at it in a couple of projects. So there’s some evidence that it can be effective, especially for getting more, you know…the idea is you can get more time for science if you are integrating with other subjects. But one thing to kind of caution is like, students need to have opportunities to learn each discipline when they’re doing integrated instruction. So you don’t wanna just have, like, math in your science. Kids already know to just, like, support it. Then it’s hard to take time from math to put it into science when they’re not actually learning anything new. That’s the easy thing to do, though, is say, “Oh, my kids already know how to measure. We did that in a previous unit. So now we’ll we’ll do it as part of our science instruction.” So it’s a lot of work to make it so they’re learning something new, mathematics and science, at the same time. And it’s not really something that we think that teachers should be having to do on their own, with all the other things that teachers have to do. The last thing they need to do is be creating their own, you know, curriculum. Something that’s already…you know, it’s not straightforward. So we’ve been talking about it, we think it’s really something that instructional materials maybe need to be focusing on instead of teachers having to do that on their own,

Eric Cross (31:01):

Teachers would implement it, but asking them to create it is a whole different thing, and it’s a huge ask.

Courtney Plumley (31:08):

Yes.

Eric Cross (31:08):

Yeah. And, did I hear you right? So the ideal situation would’ve been the students learning a newer math concept, but embedded in a science kind of context? Or was that the better way? Versus, “I’m gonna take a math concept they already know and then just put it into the science setting?”

Courtney Plumley (31:26):

Well, if the idea is that you can get more science time if you’re, you know, integrating things, so you can maybe take time away from a specific math block by putting it with science, or whatever, then if the math is something that the kids already know, now you’re just taking away. I think that that has to be new in both cases, in order to justify having more time.

Eric Cross (31:49):

Right. Eric, in the secondary level, any thoughts on that? On integrating these disciplines together?

Eric R. Banilower (31:56):

I think, you know, just like at the elementary level, it can be challenging to do it well. When I taught, I taught my last couple years in a kind of school-within-a-school kind of situation, where our goal was to try to integrate science, mathematics, and language arts. And it’s hard to do that in a meaningful way. And we did not have curriculum materials given to us to help us do this. We were trying to figure out how to do this on our own, while we were teaching 200 kids a day in our subjects. Right? And five preparations. And you know, it’s a big ask of any teacher. And there are teachers who thrive on this and are great at this. And, you know, that’s one thing I wanna, make clear: our data is about the system, and we are former teachers. Almost everyone who works at Horizon is a former teacher. We have the greatest respect for teachers and what they do. And what our data is showing is are kind of like areas where the system isn’t providing teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things. I think at the high school level, there has been this idea of project-based learning where students are bringing together different skills, different ideas from across disciplines. And I think there’s, again, a lot of potential in doing that. But trying to develop those experiences so that they are doing service to the different subjects, so students are learning what they’re supposed to learn in English Language Arts, that they’re learning, important mathematics, and that this is in a science context, where they are getting to do and understand what science is and how science, as a discipline, operates…that’s just a really hard thing to develop.

Eric Cross (33:53):

So what I’m hearing—and I really appreciate the nuance in this, because it’s not a simple “Yes. Integrated is better,”—I’m hearing “Yes. Quality control.” “Yes. It needs to be written not by teachers; they’re the practitioners.” It’s “Yes. And,” not just simply binary. Which…it’s so easy to wanna chunk things and say yes or no on things. But this one seems a much more nuanced approach. And in a future episode, you mentioned project-based learning, we’re gonna try and talk to people who have thoughts on this. And I really appreciate that you talked about project-based learning, because also, how do you evaluate that? How do you evaluate whether or not it is high quality? Is this is something I see? You know, high-quality standards, highest quality science teaching, highly qualified teachers. It’s something that I see often. Now, based on all your research, this is kind of the 30,000-foot view. What advice might you have for people who are thinking about changing the way science is taught in this country? Which hasn’t changed since 1977, at least since we’ve been measuring it. Any advice for people who do want to act? Another way to ask, it might be, if you were given a magic wand, <laugh>, you have all power, what might you do if you can control the entire vertical system?

Eric R. Banilower (35:07):

Yeah, so a clarification, I do think science instruction has changed. It has evolved. I think there’s a lot of really good things going on in different pockets of the country. One of the challenges is bringing those good ideas and good practices to scale. Right? There are approximately 1.2 million teachers of science K–12 in this country. That’s a lot of people. And about 80% of those are elementary teachers who are responsible for teaching other subjects as well. So my thinking is often about, “How do we take what we know and that we’ve learned through decades of research is effective, and impact a large number of teachers, and therefore a large number of students?” And you know, Courtney I think has hinted at this already. And you’ve mentioned it too, Eric, is that teaching is a profession, right? And it’s a craft. But in no other profession do practitioners have the expectation that they’re developing their own tools and methods for their work. I know when I was in my teacher preparation program, and it’s still extremely common, one of the assignments perspective teachers are given is to develop a unit and develop a lesson, right? You don’t have doctors being asked to develop new treatments and new tests to use. Their job is to get to know their patient, assess what’s going on, and then using research-based methods to develop a plan of action, right? And I think that analogy works really well in education and is a way that we could have a scalable approach for kind of raising the floor across the country for the quality of science education. Giving teachers research-based materials, high-quality instructional materials, that they can then use and adapt to meet the needs of their students, would allow them to focus on getting to know their students, seeing what their strengths are, seeing where they have room for growth, and using the materials they’re given to help those students progress. And I think that is definitely a way where we could have a big impact at a large scale.

Eric Cross (37:39):

Courtney, same question: Magic wand, all power. You can change systems from the elementary perspective. What would you do? I’m assuming part of it’s gonna be changing that 18 to 20 minute time. But even for that to happen, what would you do? What would you change?

Courtney Plumley (37:57):

Well, I don’t know. Like, for it to change, I don’t know the answer to that. But yes, increasing the time would be great. And like Eric was saying, giving teachers— ’cause again, I’m coming in, not enough probably background in science—and then, you know, when I was, when I was teaching, we had one set of textbooks for the entire grade. Six classes, right? Like, share them. But third graders aren’t gonna read textbooks anyway, right? So instead I’m going to the teacher store. I’m pulling things off the shelf. And like, “OK, yeah, sure, I’ll use this.” And nowadays, teachers are going to Teachers Pay Teachers or whatever. Because I didn’t have anything good to use. So like Eric is saying, if I had instructional materials that were good instructional materials that were gonna teach my kids, that they were gonna be engaged, that they weren’t sitting and listening to science, but they were doing science, you know, and I had professional development to actually help me do it? That’s what I think we need to have. And I mean, I know there are some people out there that are working on that, but it’s not a lot. I mean, if you look at Ed Reports, they rate how well-aligned science curriculum are to standards. And there are two right now that have Ed Reports green lights. There’s Amplify and there’s OpenSciEd. You know, so there’s not much out there for teachers to use. And, so it’s hard. It’s hard. Where am I gonna go and get this stuff if it doesn’t exist? And so I’m making it up by myself. Which we already said is not the best use of teachers’ time, when they’ve got so many other demands on their time.

Eric Cross (39:27):

Eric and Courtney, listening to both of your responses, it created a visual in my mind. And Eric, I loved your analogy of…I started thinking of a chef, a welder, and a farmer. And I thought about the chef saying like, “You’re a great chef! Now, can you go farm, and make your own food, so that you can cook it?” Or the welder who has to make his own welding tools and go smelting. You know, making the different rods. I’m not a welder. But you know, all those different parts. Or the farmer who has to build his own tractor and innovate all that stuff. You’re absolutely right, the way you articulated that. And then Courtney, you essentially said, “Give them the tools and then teach them how to use it so they can go and actually be effective with it, because you’re in front of kids doing so many different things.” There’s only so much time in the day, and teachers want to do these things; they want to, but you end up having to triage when you’re asked to. Going back to Eric’s analogy, if you’re in the ER, but you’re also creating the vaccines and you’re also doing the research on which types of vaccines are gonna be the most effective, that’s, that’s a lot to ask. And so, I appreciate both your responses on that. Now, last question, what are you both working on now? This report came out in 2018. What’s, what’s next on the horizon? Actually literally, that’s no pun intended. <laugh> What’s next? <laugh> What’s next for, for you both? What are you working on?

Eric R. Banilower (40:42):

Well, you know, we would love to do another national survey, in a few years. We have to get funding to do it. And you know, that’s always something that takes effort and isn’t a guarantee. We’ve written grants to do these studies in the past, and there’s also the dealing with the reality of the situation. I think a lot of schools, still coming off the tail end of dealing with Covid, are overwhelmed. And we’ve had a hard time, I mentioned before, recruiting schools, and it gets harder every time, just ’cause they have so much on their plate. And I couldn’t see going to a school now and saying, “Hey, one more thing. Do you mind?” So I think we have to kind of wait a little bit for things to settle down before we can do another one of these studies. It just doesn’t seem feasible right now. But we’d love to in the not-too-distant future. Other than that, Courtney and I actually work on some projects together and some projects not together. One of the things that we’re working on together is a study of a fifth grade science curriculum that was developed by Okhee Lee at NYU and her colleagues, that is both aligned with the NGSS and purposely designed to support multilingual learners in developing both their science knowledge and skills as well as their language skills. And we’ve been working with the crew at NYU to study this curriculum and try to figure out, how well it’s working and under what circumstances. So that’s been a really interesting project that’s going on right now.

Courtney Plumley (42:26):

I recently worked on a report with the Carnegie Corporation in New York that actually I think, compliments what we’ve been talking about a lot. It’s about the status of K–12 education in the US—or science education in the US! <Laugh>—and so as part of that report we interviewed like 50 science education experts across the country. We surveyed teachers, people in the university settings, researchers, and everything to kind of get a little bit more update of the state of science education right now. And so a lot of the things we’ve been talking about, we still are talking about with the people in this report four years later. So, work in progress. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (43:09):

And again, going back to 1977, based on what Eric was saying earlier, we’re looking at these large systems, these systemic changes don’t happen overnight.

Eric R. Banilower (43:20):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (43:21):

It’s very slow-moving.

Eric R. Banilower (43:22):

That’s right. I would say there is progress. I think we’ve learned a lot. We are getting better. Are we there yet? No, we’re not happy with where we are. But I think, you know, I think it’s important to be hopeful about the direction things are going in.

Eric Cross (43:37):

Well-said. I agree. Courtney. Eric, thank you so much for unpacking that report that speaks to, that validates what so many teachers across the country are experiencing. And thank you for your advocacy for high-quality science education and your passion for supporting teachers and being that voice from a data-driven perspective of what teachers experience and then advocating for solutions for them. It’s super-encouraging for me, and I know it’s gonna be really encouraging for a lot of our listeners. So thank you.

Eric R. Banilower (44:10):

Thank you for having us.

Courtney Plumley (44:12):

Yeah. Thank you, Eric.

Eric Cross (44:15):

Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Eric Banilower, Vice President of Horizon Research, and Courtney Plumley, Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. For much more, check out the show notes for a link to the 2018 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. And please remember to subscribe to Science Connections wherever you get podcasts, so that you’re not missing any of the upcoming episodes in Season three. Next time on the show, we’re gonna start laying out the road map for using science more effectively. And we’ll start by looking at the how and the why of integrating literacy instruction.

Susan Gomez Zwiep (44:49):

When we look at Science First and build language development around it, the experience tends to be more authentic and organic.

Eric Cross (44:58):

That’s next time on Science Connections: The Podcast. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Eric R. Banilower says about science

“Our data is showing us places where the system needs to provide teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things.”

– Eric R. Banilower

Vice President of Horizon Research, Inc.

Meet the guests

Eric R. Banilower is a Vice President at Horizon Research, Inc. (HRI), and has worked in education for over 30 years. Eric was previously a high school physics and physical science teacher before he joined HRI in 1997, where he has worked on a number of research and evaluation projects. Most recently, he has been the Principal Investigator of the 2012 and 2018 iterations of the National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education, a nationally representative survey focusing on the status of the K–12 STEM education system.

A middle-aged man with light hair, glasses, and a short beard is smiling, wearing a plaid shirt. The photo has a circular frame with a star and decorative lines.

Courtney Plumley is a Senior Researcher at Horizon Research, Inc. She began her career in education as an elementary school teacher before starting at HRI in 2009. In her time at HRI she has worked on many K-12 STEM research and evaluation projects. Most recently, Ms. Plumley has worked with Carnegie Corporation of New York on mapping the landscape of K-12 science education in the US and is managing the field test for the OpenSciEd elementary materials.

A woman with wavy brown hair and a red top smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with a star and accent lines.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

Illustration of a person sitting and reading a book, with abstract thought bubbles containing images of a horse and chess pieces, designed to amplify ELA research on early literacy.

Our research

Amplify ELA

Drawing on extensive research into learning, cognition, and literacy, Amplify ELA is designed specifically for middle school. In particular, the program has a strong research base behind its approach to differentiation and how it challenges all students to work critically and successfully with complex text. Amplify ELA meets criteria for Tier II-Moderate Evidence as an education intervention under ESSA.

Research base

Documento PDF titulado "Amplify ELA: La investigación detrás del programa" con cubierta blanca y etiqueta naranja "PDF" en la esquina superior derecha.

Amplify ELA: The research behind the program

Read more

Portada de un documento PDF titulado "Amplify ELA: La investigación detrás del enfoque de diferenciación".

Amplify ELA: The research behind the approach to differentiation

Read more

Ready to learn more?

Fill out this form, and we’ll be in touch shortly.

Amplify Desmos Math
for New York

Welcome to Amplify Desmos Math, a powerful new core program from Amplify and Desmos Classroom built for NYC teachers and students.

Amplify Desmos Math is built on four core tenets:

  • Math can motivate students.
  • A structured approach to problem-based learning can best tend to all aspects of rigor.
  • Student thinking is valuable and visible.
  • Students can catch up while keeping up with grade-level math.
A teacher stands in front of a classroom, pointing toward a screen, while students with raised hands sit at desks with laptops, engaging with the core curriculum through Amplify Desmos Math.

What if your students asked to do more math?

Amplify Desmos Math lessons are powerful in their ability to elicit student thinking and spark interesting, productive discussions.

The lessons pose problems that invite a variety of approaches with their dynamic and interactive learning experiences on devices, as well as experiences on paper that are flexible, creative, and engaging.

As students work online, they interact with visuals and simulations that show their thinking and decisions. When appropriate, students see other students’ responses and engage in collaborative math discussions.

A Responsive Feedback feature responds to student thinking by showing the mathematical meaning behind it. This is more powerful than simply evaluating thinking as right or wrong, because it motivates and engages students in the learning process.

A grid-based puzzle showing a green ball at (-8, -8) and a yellow star at (5, 6); user is prompted to enter coordinates to reach the star.

In this Grade 6 activity, students internalize the coordinate plane by plotting points to navigate the marble through the maze to collect the star.

A blank coordinate grid is shown next to a list of coordinate pairs to plot, ranging from (–2, –9) to (3, –3). Instructions are to plot and connect each pair in order.

This prepares students to accurately and efficiently plot points with positive and negative coordinates on grids with different scales and explain the relationship between ordered pairs that differ only by the signs of the coordinates.

A yellow submarine with floats and anchors must be adjusted to reach and collect a star positioned at -3 units in the water. A table and "Check My Work" button appear to the right.

In this Grade 7 activity, students explore positive and negative integer operations using the up and down movement of a submarine.

Screenshot of a math problem asking for the new temperature in Beijing after it drops 5°C from –2°C, with a text box and a "Submit" button for the answer.

Students are then prepared apply this understanding in a variety of word problem contexts.

A math activity interface showing four lanes with turtles, labeled 1 to 4, on a track. A prompt asks to write an equation for the turtle in lane 4 to control its movement.

In this Grade 8 activity, students create rate, distance, and time equations based on turtle races.

A blank graph with cost in dollars on the y-axis and blueberries in pounds on the x-axis, labeled for a problem about blueberry pricing.

This prepares students to understand that a graph representing a proportional relationship is a line through (0, 0) and (1, k). They also begin to see connections between a context and features of a corresponding graph, equation, and table.

Data at your fingertips on the road to mastery

Digital assessment report with tabs for Reports, WAT, and Admin Reports. Displays classes, units, assessments, and scoring details for high and low-performing items, including raw scores.

1

Pre-Unit Checks show the range of student mastery for the entire class and identify strengths and needs by standard.

Two overlapping cards detail a math unit overview and learning goals, focusing on equivalent ratios and proportional relationships in tables, equations, and graphs.

2

In each unit, lessons are designed and sequenced to help students fully master critical standards and build computational fluency. Each lesson is part of a carefully constructed instructional sequence that scaffolds students’ cognitive mathematical development.

A math problem prompt is displayed above, with a table comparing orange and pineapple juice recipes below. Another box describes "7.2 Practice Day 1" learning goals.

3

Daily practice problems and frequent practice days reinforce concepts and build fluency.

Screenshot of an assessment report and instructions for Assessment Form A, highlighting score distribution, student performance, and requirements like blank paper and a calculator.

4

End-of-Unit Assessments and reporting analysis pinpoint students requiring remediation with specific standards and concepts.

Facilitate a collaborative, connected classroom community.

The powerful teacher facilitation tools in Amplify Desmos Math give teachers insight into student thinking in real time. Teachers can select student work to display and discuss quickly and easily, leading to better questions that guide more productive discussions.

Amplify Desmos Math helps guide the learning process by connecting students to each other and to an understanding that they can use math to make sense of the world. Students learn and collaborate in every lesson. Whether using print, digital, or a mix of both, students stay connected to each other’s ideas and thinking, fueling classroom conversations and a shared understanding of math.

Three students sit at a table in a classroom, smiling and looking at a laptop together, with notebooks and papers in front of them.
An illustrated Amplify Desmos Math textbook and a computer screen showing a digital math activity about making pizza ingredients.

Standards alignment

Amplify Desmos Math is customized specifically to meet the New York State Next Generation Math Learning Standards. Within each document below, you’ll find direct links to lessons and activities where each individual standard is addressed.

Grade 6 correlation
Grade 7 correlation
Grade 8 correlation

The program is also aligned with the expectations outlined in the New York City Department of Education Definition of Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education and the New York State Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Framework. Download the CR-SE alignment.

Digital review

Ready to explore the program? To log in, click the orange “Review now” button below, select “Log in with Amplify” and use the following login credentials:

Username: t.nycadmsample-01@tryamplify.net

Password: AmplifyNumber1

To review Algebra 1 content from Desmos Math 6–A1, which serves as the foundation for Amplify Desmos Math, click this link after logging in using the credentials above.

Two illustrated math textbooks labeled Amplify Desmos Math for grades 7 and 8, shown above a laptop displaying a digital balance scale activity.
Two women in an office setting look at a computer monitor together, both appearing focused and engaged. One is seated while the other stands beside her.

Support

Throughout your review, you can reach our support team by email or phone. We are available any time over:

Live chat: Click the orange icon while logged in to get immediate help.

Phone: Call our toll-free number: (888)-960-0380.

Email: Send an email to help@amplify.com. In the message body, please include your name and question. Provide as much detail as possible, so we can help you find a solution.

Welcome, Reviewers to Amplify Desmos Math California!

The video on the right will walk you through program navigation and how to access key features.

Click the links in the drop-down sections below to explore Algebra 1.

For helpful navigation tips and more program information, view the Amplify Desmos Math Program Guide for Secondary.

Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards

Standards maps

  • Algebra 1

Evaluation Criteria Maps

  • Algebra 1

Category 2: Program Organization

Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups.

Proficiency Progression

Lessons and units in Amplify Desmos Math are designed around a Proficiency Progression, a model that steps out problem-based learning by systematically building students’ curiosity into lasting grade-level understanding.

In the Proficiency Progression, lessons begin by activating students’ natural curiosity and offering opportunities to generate new ideas through collaboration. Teachers are then able to refine idea

Lesson design

Amplify Desmos Math is designed with a structured approach to problem-based learning that systematically builds on students’ curiosity and allows students to grapple with the Big Ideas of the California Framework. Every lesson activity is organized into a Launch, Monitor, Connect format.

The launch is a short, whole-class conversation that creates a need or excitement, provides clarity, or helps students connect to their prior knowledge or personal experience, which ensures that everyone has access to the upcoming work.

As students work individually, in pairs, or in groups, teachers explore student thinking, ask questions, and provide support to help move the conversations closer to the intended math learning goal.

Teachers connect students’ ideas to the key learning goals of the lesson, facilitating class discussions that help students synthesize and solidify the big ideas.

Routines

Instructional routines can be found throughout each lesson in the Teacher Edition and digital Presentation Screens. Math Language Routines (MLRs) are used within lessons to highlight student-developed language and ideas, cultivate conversation, support mathematical sense-making, and promote meta-cognition. Here is a list of the instructional routines used in the Amplify Desmos Math curriculum:

  • MLR1: Stronger and Clearer Each Time
  • MLR2: Collect and Display
  • MLR3: Critique, Correct, Clarify
  • MLR5: Co-Craft Questions
  • MLR6: Three Reads
  • MLR7: Compare and Connect
  • Decide and Defend
  • Notice and Wonder
  • Number Talk
  • Tell a Story
  • Think-Pair-Share
  • Which One Doesn’t Belong?

Program Structure

Amplify Desmos Math combines the best of problem-based lessons, intervention, personalized practice, and assessments into a coherent and engaging experience for both students and teachers.

Lesson Structure

Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups.

Scope and Sequence

Program components

Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups.

Category 3: Assessments

Unit and lesson-level assessment

Performance tasks

Benchmark assessments

CASSPP-aligned assessment preparation

Self-Reflection

Data and reporting

Category 4: Access and Equity

In-lesson differentiation

Within every lesson activity, teachers can use the Differentiation Teacher Moves suggestions to provide in-the-moment instructional support while students are engaged in the work of the lesson.

Teachers are provided with clear student actions and understanding to look for, each matched with immediately usable suggestions for how to respond to the student thinking illustrated in each row of the table. In addition to using these suggestions in the moment as teachers monitor student work, teachers can review the Differentiation table in advance to help them anticipate how students are likely to approach the activity.

Data to guide instruction

Amplify Desmos Math Reporting provides teachers and administrators with unified data insights so that educators have visibility into what students know about grade-level math. Areas of potential student need are highlighted to allow teachers to modify their instruction and target differentiated support. With actionable insights from mCLASS Benchmark and Progress Monitoring Assessments, teachers are given recommendations they need to inform Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention.

Mini-Lessons

Amplify Desmos Math Mini-Lessons are 15-minute lessons aligned to the most critical topics throughout a unit. Teacher-led Mini-Lessons are used to provide targeted intervention to small groups of students who need additional support or to re-engage students with content that they may need more time on.

Amplify Desmos Math Mini-Lessons are the perfect complement to our problem-based approach, because they provide more explicit instruction opportunities and leverage a consistent instructional routine (Modeled Review, Guided Practice, Check for Understanding).

Fluency Practice

Math Adventures

Centers (Grades K–5)

Centers are engaging, hands-on games for students to play collaboratively to strengthen their understanding of key skills and concepts.

Centers are designed so that students engage in them with minimal teacher direction and support. Each Center has multiple stages, so that students return to the same Center game repeatedly within and across grade levels. The content of the Center grows in complexity to align with grade-level standards in a scaffolded manner.

Extensions

Amplify Desmos Math extensions are 10- to 15-minute activities aligned to the most critical topics in a sub-unit. Extensions can provide targeted intervention to small groups of students ready for an extra challenge or the whole class.

Amplify Desmos Math extensions build on our student-led, problem-based approach, providing more opportunities for students to engage in creative and rigorous problems that can be approached with different strategies.

These low-lift activities give teachers flexibility and provide students with open-ended, hands-on problems they can choose from.

Boost Personalized Learning

Category 5: Instructional Planning and Support


Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups.

Locate the Digitial Access flyer from your Reviewer Binder.
Click the orange button below to access the digital platform.
Click login with Amplify.
Enter the username and password provided on your Digital Access flyer.

Contact

Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups. Lorem ipsum is placeholder text commonly used in the graphic, print, and publishing industries for previewing layouts and visual mockups.

Welcome, Reviewers to Amplify Desmos Math California!

To view this protected page, enter the password below:



Illustration of a person sitting and reading a book, with abstract thought bubbles containing images of a horse and chess pieces, designed to amplify ELA research on early literacy.

Our research

Amplify ELA

Drawing on extensive research into learning, cognition, and literacy, Amplify ELA is designed specifically for middle school. In particular, the program has a strong research base behind its approach to differentiation and how it challenges all students to work critically and successfully with complex text. Amplify ELA meets criteria for Tier II-Moderate Evidence as an education intervention under ESSA.

Research base

Documento PDF titulado "Amplify ELA: La investigación detrás del programa" con cubierta blanca y etiqueta naranja "PDF" en la esquina superior derecha.

Amplify ELA: The research behind the program

Read more

Portada de un documento PDF titulado "Amplify ELA: La investigación detrás del enfoque de diferenciación".

Amplify ELA: The research behind the approach to differentiation

Read more

Efficacy

Cover page of a PDF document titled "Amplify ELA Embedded Measures predicts student performance on state end-of-year assessments," displayed with brief content description and a "PDF" label on the right. The Amplify ELA research also explores early literacy trends.

Amplify ELA Embedded Measures predicts student performance on state end-of-year assessments

Read more

Cover of a PDF titled "Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6–8," featuring images of historical figures and text stating improved reading outcomes for grades 6 & 7 students across demographic subgroups, based on recent Amplify ELA research.

Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6-8: ESSA Evidence Tier II

Read more

Cover of a PDF document titled "Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6-8," featuring a study on early literacy and highlighting improved reading outcomes for Grade 6 students in Seminole County, Florida, with an illustration of diverse elements.

Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6-8: ESSA Evidence Tier III

Read more

Cover of the PDF titled "Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6-8" showcasing improved early literacy outcomes in Seminole County, Florida. The cover includes an illustration of a person and various academic icons, reflecting insights from Amplify ELA research.

Impact of Amplify English Language Arts 6-8: ESSA Technical Write Up

Read more

District success stories

Cover of a PDF titled "Building coherent K–8 literacy instruction," featuring a simple line illustration and an orange "District Success Story" label at the top left, highlights early literacy strategies informed by Amplify ELA research.

Three Rivers Local School District, Ohio: Three Rivers achieves 70.7% sixth-grade ELA proficiency—16.2 points above state average—with Amplify ELA, Amplify CKLA, and mCLASS.

Read more

Cover page of a PDF titled "Achieving student growth in middle school," featuring a simple outline of Florida and a highlighted point for Lake County.

Lake County School District, Florida: Florida’s Lake County School District achieves 54–62% growth on middle-school state assessments, with Amplify ELA.

Read more

Cover of a PDF titled "Revitalizing middle-school literacy instruction" with an outline of Missouri and a highlighted district, produced by Amplify.

Mehlville School District, Missouri: Mehlville boosts middle school reading achievement with Amplify ELA.

Read more

Portada de un documento en formato PDF titulado "Construir conocimientos para el éxito en la escuela secundaria" del distrito escolar de West Jefferson Hills, que incluye un texto sobre el crecimiento de la lectura con Amplify ELA. Esquema del distrito en la portada.

West Jefferson Hills School District, Pennsylvania: Students achieve a perfect reading growth score of 100

Read more

PDF cover titled "Achieving literacy growth and student engagement in middle school" with a map outline of Oklahoma highlighting Mustang Public Schools; features Amplify ELA research and the Amplify logo at the bottom.

Mustang Public Schools, Oklahoma: Students had double-digit gains in ELA performance

Read more

Ready to learn more?

Fill out this form, and we’ll be in touch shortly.

A line drawing of a spilled liquid with a smartphone partially submerged in it.

Explore more of our research.

Learn more about the research behind our programs.

Literacy Essentials, Episode 4

Science of Reading Essentials: The science of learning

On this Science of Reading Essentials episode, we're taking a deeper dive into the science of learning to explore how memory, cognitive load, and knowledge building can transform your literacy instruction. On this synthesis episode, host Susan Lambert, Ed.D., weaves in the insights of our expert guests—Natalie Wexler; Nathaniel Swain, Ph.D.; Hugh Catts, Ph.D.; Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.; Peter C. Brown; Jamey Peavler, Ed.D.; and David Rapp, Ph.D. With their insights, Susan reflects on how memory works and why understanding its processes is foundational to effective teaching; why cognitive load theory and background knowledge are game-changers for literacy instruction; and which evidence-based strategies—like retrieval practice, spaced repetition, and mixed practice—make learning stick.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Portrait of a woman with short, curly blonde hair, light skin, and a white top, looking at the camera with a neutral expression—an image that could illustrate modern perspectives in literacy instruction or the science of learning.

Natalie Wexler

Natalie Wexler is the author of multiple books, including Beyond the Science of Reading: Connecting Literacy Instruction to the Science of Learning and The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System—and How to Fix It; and is the co-author, together with Judith C. Hochman, Ed.D., of The Writing Revolution: A Guide to Advancing Thinking Through Writing in All Subjects and Grades. She has a free Substack newsletter called Minding the Gap, and she was the host of the Knowledge Comprehension podcast, Season 1. More information is available on her website, www.nataliewexler.com.

A man with short brown hair and a beard, wearing a light blue collared shirt, poses in front of a blurred background, reflecting his passion for reading comprehension and literacy instruction.

Nathaniel Swain, Ph.D.

Nathaniel Swain is a teacher, instructional coach, and writer. He produces a blog for teachers called Dr. Swain’s Cognitorium and is cohost of the Chalk Dust podcast with Rebecca Birch. Nathaniel works directly with schools and systems through an online learning platform called Luminary.

He founded a community of educators committed to the science of learning, called Think Forward Educators. He also has a best-selling book, Harnessing the Science of Learning: Success Stories to Help Kickstart Your School Improvement.

A bald older man with a white goatee and mustache, wearing a dark collared shirt, smiles at the camera against a plain gray background—exuding warmth often found in dedicated literacy instruction professionals.

Hugh Catts, Ph.D.

Hugh Catts’ research interests include the early identification and prevention of reading and disabilities. He is a former board member of the International Dyslexia Association and former president of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading. He has received the Samuel T. Orton Award, the International Dyslexia Association’s highest honor, and the Honors of the Association award from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, for his career contributions in these disciplines. His current research concerns the early identification of reading and language difficulties and the nature and assessment of reading comprehension problems.

A bald man with red-framed glasses and a brown jacket stands in front of a brick wall, embodying the spirit of literacy instruction as he looks at the camera.

Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

Daniel Willingham is a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, where he has taught since 1992. Until about 2000, his research focused solely on the brain basis of learning and memory. Today, all of his research concerns the application of cognitive psychology to K–12 education. He is the author of several books, including the best-selling Why Don’t Students Like School? and Outsmart Your Brain. His writing on education has appeared in 23 languages. In 2017, he was appointed by President Barack Obama to the National Board for Education Sciences.

An older man with white hair and a beard, wearing a blue checked shirt, stands outdoors near a body of water with trees in the background, perhaps reflecting on reading comprehension or the science of learning.

Peter C. Brown

Peter C. Brown is a bestselling writer and novelist, retired from a career as a management consultant. He is the lead author of Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. Make It Stick has been translated into 17 foreign languages and received international acclaim for changing the way we understand learning.

Jamey Peavler, Ed.D.

Jamey Peavler is a co-director of and full-time instructor in the Graduate Reading Science program at Mount St. Joseph University. Before joining Mount St. Joseph, Jamey served as director of training for the M.A. Rooney Foundation. In addition, she works for the National Council for Teacher Quality (NCTQ) as a higher-education textbook and teacher licensure reviewer. Her research interests include instructional design, the impact of spaced practice and interleaving to support effortful retrieval and retention of information, the role of oral language and syntactic awareness on comprehension and written expression, and foundational skills for supporting literacy in the early childhood setting.

A woman with long brown hair is smiling at the camera, surrounded by books and plants blurred in the background—a perfect scene for anyone passionate about reading comprehension and the science of learning.
A man with short gray hair, a beard, and glasses, known for his work in literacy instruction, is wearing a purple checkered shirt and smiling slightly against a plain white background.

David Rapp, Ph.D.

David Rapp is the Walter Dill Scott Professor of Education, Social Policy, and Psychology at Northwestern University. His research examines language and memory, focusing on the cognitive mechanisms responsible for successful learning and knowledge failures. This has included investigations into the influence of inaccurate information on comprehension, the evaluation of technologies that support formal and informal learning, and the iterative development of tools and curricula intended to support literacy. Rapps’ projects have been funded by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, the National Institute on Aging, and Meta.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert, Ed.D.

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“To build a meaningful memory of something that you can hold on to and use, you have to think about it.”

—Hugh Catts

“Memory is a cognitive process. It's the way the brain encodes, stores, and retrieves information.”

—Susan Lambert

“You can't learn something new if it doesn't connect to something you already know.”

—Peter C. Brown

“The catch about writing is it's hugely important. It can help cement knowledge and long-term memory, deep knowledge, et cetera.”

—Natalie Wexler

“When we have knowledge in our long-term memory, all of these limitations suddenly disappear.”

—Nathaniel Swain

“We can only work with a limited set of information and when there's too much happening in our working memory, we experience cognitive overload. Essentially, our system is overloaded and we shut down.”

—Susan Lambert

“Essentially, memory is what enables us to retain knowledge, skills, and experiences, forming the foundation for all learning and cognition.”

—Susan Lambert

“The resonance model of comprehension suggests when someone asks a question, lots of ideas get activated automatically in memory.”

—David Rapp

“Your mind is very good at bringing up from memory the necessary facts, the facts that will help you given the context.”

—Daniel Willingham

“A lot of our students that are having difficulty are experiencing cognitive overload. So the first thing we need to think about is how are we gonna minimize that for them?”

—Jamey Peavler

Season 9, Episode 7

Neurodiversity and the reading brain, with Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

Susan is joined by Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Michigan, to give educators the perspective of a developmental cognitive neuroscientist on literacy development. Starting with the basics of cognitive science versus brain science, Ioulia gives a comprehensive overview into how the brain changes as children learn to read, including differences seen in neurodiverse students and multilingual/English learners. Ioulia then answers a question from our listener mailbag on neuroscience and dyslexia and how current research can inform teaching strategies. Ioulia ends with a rallying message that scientists, teachers, and children cannot stand alone and need to find ways to connect with each other to strengthen literacy as a whole.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D., is a professor of Psychology at the University of Michigan. She studies literacy development in children who speak English and other languages. As a developmental cognitive neuroscientist, she uses a child-friendly functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy (fNRS) brain-imaging method to examine how learning to read changes children’s language, cognition, and brain. These studies include research with typically developing readers and at-risk learners such as those with dyslexia and developmental language disorders (DLD). In her current research, Ioulia focuses on children learning to speak and read in English, Spanish, and Chinese. Through this work, she addresses the universal, language-specific, and bilingual influences on child reading development and dyslexia.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is the Chief Academic Officer of Elementary Humanities at Amplify, and the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. As a former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, Lambert is dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Portrait of a woman with short blonde hair, wearing glasses, a black top, and a necklace. She is smiling and facing the camera.

Quotes

“When you begin to read, you really have to analyze everything in front of you. The letter, the shape of the letter, how it connects to the sound. And proficient readers just look at the whole thing and they grab it—and it's like they heard it. It is almost no difference. I speak; I read; it's a continuous stream of language and I just grab it.”

—Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

“We talked about languages being different. They're exercising slightly different muscles of your language system.”

—Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

“Science is informed by teachers and children. We're all together. I do not teach children. Teachers don't usually do science. But we have to find ways of connecting with each other.”

—Ioulia Kovelman, Ph.D.

Season 10, Special episode

Cultivating critical thinkers in your classroom, starring Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

We’re excited to share a special episode from our friends at our sister podcast, Beyond My Years.

Host Ana Torres is joined by nationally recognized educational consultant and thought leader Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D., to discuss what critical thinking is and how to help students develop it. In addition to explaining why critical thinking is crucial for long-term academic success, Mitchell also gives educators four clear steps that they can implement to effectively nurture critical thinking skills in their classrooms. Ana is then joined by Beyond My Years' Classroom Insider extraordinaire Eric Cross, who discusses how he encourages his students to hone their critical thinking skills in class.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man with short braids and a trimmed beard, wearing a dark suit and bright pink shirt and tie, looks directly at the camera—perfect for illustrating teacher strategies or how to develop critical thinking skills in students.

Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D., has over 20 years of experience in K–12 as a teacher, coach, administrator, district leader, and thought leader. As a school administrator, he achieved impressive gains, including raising DIBELS® scores from 43% to 72%. He has spoken at top literacy events, including Amplify’s symposia, the Black Literacy Matters Conference, the Dyslexia Alliance for Black Children annual conference, and others. He leads a citywide fellowship supporting 25 literacy leaders in New Orleans, and serves as Managing Director of Leading Educators. He also serves on the Board of Directors for The Reading League. He holds a B.A. in elementary education, an M.A. in teacher leadership, and a Ph.D. in educational administration.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“When you are a school administrator, you can't be confused as to what your identity is. People expect you to step in with voice, with passion, with vision, and direct the path.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“When we talk about knowledge building, when we talk about knowledge acquisition, it's actually predicated on critical thinking. That critical thinking  thinking is not just a higher-level task that we have kids do. It's deep thinking.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“[Critical thinking] is actually cognitive support. It's a mental act of process in which you acquire knowledge and understanding.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“During academic discussion, I'm not expecting the teacher to be quiet. I'm expecting the teacher to orchestrate thinking, to hold the pacing of the discussion. You know when to slow the class down, and let them think about this critical idea. You know when to ask that probing question that makes kids think, ‘Hmm.’ I'm looking for those discourse moves that teachers make.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“When I see questioning that really probes, that's how I know I'm in a classroom where a teacher honors students' thinking. It is an honor to hear what children have to think.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“That's how you know you're in a classroom with critical thinking: We're not rushing the conversation. We're enjoying it.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“There's an art and science to teaching, and I think that they're two different things.”

—Eric Cross

“The importance of modeling can’t be overstated.”

—Ana Torres

“If we want to get to these higher levels of rigor or higher levels of thinking, that has to be built on a foundation. And when we connect that to something meaningful, the knowledge and the learning get deeper.”

—Eric Cross

“If you're engaged emotionally, that's going to help you be engaged cognitively.”

—Eric Cross

Season 2, Episode 8

Cultivating critical thinkers in your classroom, starring Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

Ana Torres is joined by nationally recognized educational consultant and thought leader Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D., to discuss what critical thinking is and how to help students develop it. In addition to explaining why critical thinking is crucial for long-term academic success, Mitchell also gives educators four clear steps that they can implement to effectively develop critical thinking skills in their classrooms. Ana is then joined by Classroom Insider extraordinaire Eric Cross, who discusses how he encourages his students to hone their critical thinking skills in his classroom.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man with braided hair and a trimmed beard, wearing a black suit jacket, pink shirt, and pink tie, stands outdoors with greenery in the background.

Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D. is a nationally recognized educational consultant with 20+ years in K–12 as a teacher, coach, administrator, district leader, and thought leader. As a school administrator, he achieved impressive gains, including raising DIBELS scores from 43% to 72%. He has spoken at top literacy events including Amplify’s symposia, the Black Literacy Matters Conference, the Dyslexia Alliance for Black Children’s annual conference, and others. He leads a citywide fellowship supporting 25 literacy leaders in New Orleans, and serves as Managing Director of Leading Educators. He also serves on the Board of Directors for The Reading League. He holds a B.A. in Elementary Education, an M.A. in Teacher Leadership, and a Ph.D. in Educational Administration.

Meet our host, Ana Torres.

Ana has been an educator for 30 years, working in both the K–8 and higher education sectors. She served as an administrator and instructor at various public and private colleges and universities and as a bilingual and dual language teacher, dual language math and reading interventionist, dual language instructional coach, assistant principal, and principal in K–8 schools. Ana is currently the Senior Biliteracy and Multilingual Product Specialist at Amplify, and delivers literacy and biliteracy presentations across the nation. Ana’s passion and advocacy for biliteracy and support for all students from all walks of life has led her to educate leaders, teachers, and parents about the positive impact of bilingualism and biliteracy in our world.

A woman with long dark hair and hoop earrings smiles at the camera while wearing a black blazer, standing outdoors—ready to discuss classroom challenges or share insights on her teacher podcast.
A man with short, closely-cropped hair and a trimmed beard smiles at the camera against a light gray background, ready to inspire diverse learners in the math classroom.

Meet our Classroom Insider, Eric Cross.

Eric Cross is a middle school science teacher who hopes to someday be a lifelong educator, like the guests on Beyond My Years! In each episode, Eric connects with host Ana Torres to discuss her guests’ best insights, gleaned from their long and rewarding careers in the classroom. Then, Eric talks about bringing some of their wisdom into his current classroom and busy life.

Quotes

“When you are a school administrator, you can't be confused as to what your identity is. People expect you to step in with voice, with passion, with vision, and direct the path.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“When we talk about knowledge building, when we talk about knowledge acquisition, it's actually predicated on critical thinking. That critical thinking is not just a higher-level task that we have kids do. It's deep thinking.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“[Critical thinking] is actually cognitive support. It's a mental act, a process in which you acquire knowledge and understanding.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“When I see questioning that really probes, that's how I know I'm in a classroom where a teacher honors students' thinking. It is an honor to hear what children have to think.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“That's how you know you're in a classroom with critical thinking: We're not rushing the conversation. We're enjoying it.”

—Mitchell Brookins, Ph.D.

“There's an art and a science to teaching, and I think that they're two different things.”

—Eric Cross

“The importance of modeling can’t be overstated.”

—Ana Torres

“If you're engaged emotionally, that's going to help you be engaged cognitively.”

—Eric Cross

Season 10, Episode 6

Understanding assessment, with Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan is joined by Affiliated Distinguished Scholar at the Stern Center for Language and Learning, Melissa Farrall, Ph.D., to discuss understanding assessment. Melissa explains exactly why it’s beneficial for every educator to understand the fundamentals of assessment, especially comprehension assessment. Together, Melissa and Susan discuss the relationship between reading comprehension and language comprehension, why reading comprehension can be challenging to assess, and how, in a perfect world, educators would be trained both in the Science of Reading and in assessment.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Portrait of a smiling woman with shoulder-length wavy hair, shown inside a circular frame with a blue open book icon at the bottom right, representing expertise in comprehension and literacy programs.

Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

Melissa Farrall, Ph.D., is the author of Reading Assessment: Linking Language, Literacy and Cognition, and co-author of All About Tests & Assessments. She recently retired as director for evaluation at the Stern Center for Language and Learning in Vermont, and held an appointment as clinical assistant professor in the Department of Neurological Sciences at the Robert Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, where she trained medical professionals about learning disabilities and reading. She continues to train evaluators and teach courses through the Stern Center and Vermont State University.

She has her doctorate from Brown University in Slavic linguistics, her master’s degree in learning disabilities from Rivier College, and certification as a specialist in the Assessment of Intellectual Functioning.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“My view of reading comprehension is that it is ‘thinking guided by print.’”

—Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

“If we supplement our evaluation with measures of listening comprehension, we can then get a sense of an individual's ability to make meaning. ”

—Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

“One of the interesting things about being in this field is that no two people share the same definition of what reading comprehension is. Because we don't necessarily agree as to what reading comprehension is, there is certainly a lot of diversity in the way that we decide we want to assess it.”

—Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

“In a perfect world, we would have not just evaluators, but educators who are trained both in the Science of Reading and in assessment so that we can all sit at the same table and participate as we review evaluation results.”

—Melissa Farrall, Ph.D.

Season 10, Episode 4

The science of memory and misinformation, with David Rapp, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Northwestern University Professor of Education, Social Policy, and Psychology David Rapp. David’s research focuses on language and memory, and his conversation with Susan gives insight into how memory is connected to comprehension. The first half of the episode is spent defining comprehension as a process, a product, and a higher-order cognitive process. David then digs into how that definition informs the ways in which educators assess comprehension and where they can look for potential failure points. One of these failure points includes misinformation. David addresses what happens when misinformation is stored in long-term memory. He details the issues this can cause for student comprehension, and he gives guidance on how to prevent and correct them.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man with short gray hair, glasses, and a trimmed beard is wearing a checkered shirt and standing against a plain white background. An illustrated pencil in the lower right hints at student engagement and creativity.

David Rapp, Ph.D.

David Rapp is the Walter Dill Scott Professor of Education, Social Policy, and Psychology at Northwestern University. His research examines language and memory, focusing on the cognitive mechanisms responsible for successful learning and knowledge failures. This has included investigations into the influence of inaccurate information on comprehension, the evaluation of technologies that support formal and informal learning, and the iterative development of tools and curricula intended to support literacy. Rapp’s projects have been funded by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, the National Institute on Aging, and Meta.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“In terms of being exposed to misinformation, we see even if people have been exposed to inaccurate ideas—even once—it's encoded into memory; it's potentially gonna be there to influence you.”

—David Rapp, Ph.D.

“Once the information is in memory, you can't really get rid of it. What you can try to do is make other memories more powerful, more likely to resonate.”

—David Rapp, Ph.D.

“It feels easy for us to comprehend texts if we're well practiced at it. It feels easy, but it's actually a lot of cognitive operations going on behind the scenes and a lot of years of practice.”

—David Rapp, Ph.D.

“Sometimes our most effective processes actually lead us to misunderstand. For example, you're really good at encoding information to memory, that's great…except if you're exposed to inaccurate ideas, that's a problem.”

—David Rapp, Ph.D.

Season 5, Episode 2

Uncovering the causes of math anxiety

We’re continuing our season theme of math anxiety, going beyond the basics, diving deeper into what causes it, and how we can help students move forward. In this episode, we talk to Dr. Erin Maloney from the University of Ottawa to better understand what’s actually happening in the brain when a person experiences math anxiety, and how we can take steps to shift student mindsets in a positive direction. Listen now and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!

Portrait of a smiling woman with long hair, framed in a circle on a background decorated with black and yellow geometric shapes.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with straight, light brown hair and a maroon top smiles at the camera. She is framed by a white circular border with geometric graphic elements in the corners.

Dr. Erin Maloney

Dr. Erin Maloney is an Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair at the University of Ottawa. Her research sits at the intersection of Cognitive Psychology, Developmental Psychology, and Education and focuses on cognitive and emotional factors that relate to academic achievement. She is a world-renowned expert on the study of math anxiety, conducting research in the lab, in homes, and in classrooms with children, parents, and their teachers.

Meet our hosts: Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer

Bethany Lockhart Johnson is an elementary school educator and author. Prior to serving as a multiple-subject teacher, she taught theater and dance, and now loves incorporating movement and creative play into her classroom. Bethany is committed to helping students find joy in discovering their identities as mathematicians. In addition to her role as a full-time classroom teacher, Bethany is a Student Achievement Partners California Core Advocate and is active in national and local mathematics organizations. Bethany is a member of the Illustrative Mathematics Elementary Curriculum Steering Committee and serves as a consultant, creating materials to support families during distance learning.

Dan Meyer taught high school math to students who didn’t like high school math. He has advocated for better math instruction on CNN, Good Morning America, Everyday With Rachel Ray, and TED.com. He earned his doctorate from Stanford University in math education and is currently the Dean of Research at Desmos, where he explores the future of math, technology, and learning. Dan has worked with teachers internationally and in all 50 United States and was named one of Tech & Learning’s 30 Leaders of the Future.

Two people smiling at the camera, each in a separate circular frame, with geometric shapes decorating the background—perfect for a math teacher lounge or highlighting fresh math teacher resources.

Quotes

“If we can change their mindset, then we can set students on a path to more opportunities and success.”

—Dr. Erin Maloney

Stay connected!

Season 10, Episode 1

The (not so) Simple View of Reading, with Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Wesley Hoover, a psycholinguist at the University of Texas at Austin, to discuss the Simple View of Reading and how it can serve as the basis for our understanding of comprehension. Wesley digs into all the complexities of this model—which is only simple at a high level—including the meaning of language comprehension vs. reading comprehension, the impact of word recognition, and using the simple view to identify struggling students. He’ll even address the limitations of the simple view of reading, untangle common misconceptions, and give you tools for assessing the value of any model for reading that you might encounter.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Smiling older man with gray hair wearing a checkered shirt, framed by a circular border with an orange pencil graphic in the bottom right corner—an image that could represent concepts like the simple view of reading model.

Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

Wesley A. Hoover is a psycholinguist with a Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Austin. He spent 35 years at Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL), where he researched the cognitive foundations of reading, and served as President and CEO for his last 18 years. He led the 2015 merger of SEDL with AIR, where he continued to work on literacy projects before retiring in 2019. He now works as a writer, speaker, and consultant on the cognitive foundations of reading.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“To be a reader, you have to be good at two things: word recognition and language comprehension. Both of them are necessary components of reading, but neither one of them is sufficient on its own.”

—Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

“The simple view doesn't say that reading is not complex. It just says the complexity is housed in two factors, word recognition and language comprehension. And both of those are complex.”

—Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

“If you're a teacher thinking about language comprehension, whatever time you devote to helping people understand language, if you can be effective in doing that, you'll never waste a kid's time.”

—Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

“Language comprehension is unbounded. … The knowledge of the world and being able to express the knowledge of the world in language—that's always a key difficulty you work on for your entire life.”

—Wesley Hoover, Ph.D.

Season 9, Special Episode

Unlocking reading: Comprehension strategies vs. knowledge building, with Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert welcomes back researcher and author Daniel Willingham, Ph.D., to discuss reading comprehension. With only so much instruction time in the day and research supporting both comprehension strategies and knowledge building, it can be tough to know what to prioritize in the classroom. Daniel holds nothing back in outlining exactly where educators should focus their time. Together, he and Susan explore the limitations of comprehension strategies, the place for critical thinking skills in relationship to knowledge, and how to recognize when messaging around knowledge has gone too far.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A bald man with glasses, wearing a brown jacket and light blue shirt, stands in front of a brick wall. An illustrated light bulb and marks decorate the image border.

Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

Daniel Willingham, Ph.D., is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia, where he has taught since 1992. Until about 2000, his research focused solely on the brain basis of learning and memory. Today, all of his research concerns the application of cognitive psychology to K–16 education. He is the author of several books, including the best-selling Why Don’t Students Like School? and, most recently, Outsmart Your Brain. His writing on education has appeared in 23 languages.​ In 2017 he was appointed by President Barack Obama to the National Board for Education Sciences.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“Your brain is really good at only bringing out the information from long-term memory that is relevant for the context. All of that's happening outside of awareness.”

—Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

“When reading is really humming, when it's really working well, it's like visual perception. You're just enjoying the view and you're oblivious to all of the cognitive machinery in the background that's letting you see.”

—Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

“Expecting that knowledge-rich curriculum is going to solve all problems… that's [not] what a reading program is. No, a reading program is multifaceted and needs to have lots of components.”

—Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

“Knowledge accrues slowly and it's going to take a while. You need to be patient.”

—Daniel Willingham, Ph.D.

Literacy Essentials, Episode 1

Science of Reading Essentials: Writing

In this special Essentials episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert pulls from past episodes of the podcast to give you everything you need to know about science-based writing instruction. Experts include Steve Graham, Ed.D.; Young-Suk Grace Kim, Ed.D.; Natalie Wexler; and Judith Hochman, Ed.D. Listeners will walk away from this episode with a solid foundation for creating a classroom of confident and capable writers, and gain a better understanding of the connection between reading and writing, the role of handwriting and spelling, the power of sentences, and the importance of applying cognitive load theory to writing. Download our discussion guide to fuel a professional learning session!

Meet Our Guest(s):

Smiling older woman with short white hair, wearing a dark jacket, posed against a plain light background.

Judith Hochman, Ed.D.

Judith C. Hochman is the former head of The Windward School and the founder of the Windward Teacher Training Institute in White Plains, New York, as well as the former superintendent of the Greenburgh Graham Free School District in Hastings-on-Hudson, New York. She is the founder of The Writing Revolution, a not-for-profit organization which disseminates evidence-based strategies for writing instruction. Hochman is the author of Basic Writing Skills: A Manual for Teachers and co-author of The Writing Revolution: A Guide to Advancing Thinking Through Writing in All Subjects and Grades (2017, 2024).

A woman with short, curly blonde hair and light skin wears a white top and earrings, smiling softly at the camera against a neutral background.

Natalie Wexler

Natalie Wexler is the author of Beyond the Science of Reading: Connecting Literacy Instruction to the Science of Learning. She is also the author of The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System—and How to Fix It and the co-author, with Judith C. Hochman, of The Writing Revolution: A Guide to Advancing Thinking Through Writing in All Subjects and Grades. She has a free Substack newsletter called Minding the Gap, and she was the host of Season One of the Reading Comprehension Revisited podcast from the Knowledge Matters Campaign. More information is available at her website, www.nataliewexler.com.

A woman with short dark hair and glasses, wearing a dark blazer and white shirt, smiles at the camera with a blurred green background.

Young-Suk Grace Kim, Ed.D.

Young-Suk Grace Kim, Ed.D., (Harvard University) is a professor at the School of Education, University of California at Irvine. She was a former classroom teacher in San Francisco. Her scholarship focuses on understanding language and literacy development and effective instruction for children from diverse backgrounds. Her areas of research include reading comprehension, reading fluency, listening comprehension and oral language, dyslexia, higher-order cognitive skills, written composition, and reading-writing relations. She has worked extensively with monolingual children and multilingual children from various linguistic backgrounds including English, Korean, Chinese, Spanish, and Kiswahili. Her research has been supported by over $60 million in grants from the Institute of Education Sciences, the U.S. Department of Education, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the National Science Foundation. Her work was recognized by several awards, including the 2012 Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) by former President Barack Obama, the Developing Scholar Award, and the Robert M. Gagne Outstanding Student Research Award. She is an American Educational Research Association (AERA) Fellow, and serves as the editor-in-chief for Scientific Studies of Reading and the chair of the California Reading Difficulties Risk Screener Selection Panel (RDRSSP), appointed by the California State Board of Education.

A smiling older man with light skin, gray hair, and blue eyes is wearing a blue collared shirt. The background is blurred with autumn leaves visible.

Steve Graham, Ed.D.

Steve Graham is a Regents’ and Warner Professor at Arizona State University’s Mary Lou Fulton College for Teaching and Learning Innovation. For 47 years, he has studied how writing develops, how to teach it effectively, and how it can be used to support reading and learning. In recent years, he has been involved in the development and testing of digital tools for supporting writing and reading through a series of grants from the Institute of Educational Sciences and the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education. His research involves the development of writers with special needs in both elementary and secondary schools, much of which occurs in urban schools. Graham has received many awards for his contributions to literacy and was selected to the Reading Hall of Fame in 2018. He is a fellow of the American Educational Research Association, Division 15 of the American Psychological Association, and of the International Academy for Research in Learning Disabilities.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. As a former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, Lambert is dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

A woman with short, light blonde hair, wearing clear glasses, a black top, and a beaded necklace, smiles at the camera in front of a blurred outdoor background.

Quotes

“The Science of Reading encapsulates decades of research about both reading and writing—because if writing was never invented, we would not have to teach kids how to read.”

—Susan Lambert

"What we see with exceptional teachers is they have their kids write."

—Steve Graham, Ed.D.

“This is not learned by osmosis. And it's not learned by vague feedback like, 'Make it better,' or 'Add more details.' You've got to be very granular.”

—Judith Hochman, Ed.D.

Spring Special ’26, Episode 3

Systematizing literacy, with Reid Lyon, Ph.D.

On this week’s episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert, Ed.D., is joined by one of the most influential people in American education, Reid Lyon, Ph.D., to explore what it takes to make systemic change in literacy instruction. Together, Reid and Susan also discuss how literacy education could benefit from a shared vocabulary, how systems must work together from teacher preparation to classroom implementation, and what we can do to close the implementation gap.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Smiling older man with white hair wearing a light blue shirt, centered in a circular frame with orange pencil graphic in the corner, representing an expert featured on a science of reading podcast.

Reid Lyon, Ph.D.

Reid Lyon is a neuroscientist and specialist in learning disorders who currently serves as a senior advisor to the Drexel University ALLIED Hub. From 1991 to 2025, he served as Chief of the Child Development and Behavior Branch at The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)/National Institutes of Health, where he developed and oversaw research programs in cognitive neuroscience and reading development. In this role, he designed and directed the 44-site NICHD Reading Research Network and served as an advisor to President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush on developmental science, language, and reading. He co-authored landmark legislation including the Reading Excellence Act (1996) and Reading First Initiative (2002), and authored the legislative language for the National Reading Panel.

Lyon has published over 130 peer-reviewed articles and co-authored the definition of dyslexia now used by the International Dyslexia Association. A Vietnam combat veteran who received the Bronze Star, he brings both scientific expertise and personal perspective to understanding learning differences and translating research into practice and policy.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert, Ed.D.

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“I know we've let children down, but boy have we let teachers down.”

—Reid Lyon

“The hallmark of a profession is a common language displaying a common knowledge.”

—Reid Lyon

“How is it that we know so much yet we are still far behind the curve in helping the majority of struggling readers learn to read?”

—Reid Lyon

“Science is neutral. The Science of Reading is not a belief system. It's a container with facts that constantly evolves.”

—Reid Lyon

“Much of our difficulties moving the science [of literacy] into classrooms is a function of not having established ourselves as a profession.”

—Reid Lyon

“We have a responsibility to use the best information possible that has taught us how we can improve the person's life.”

—Reid Lyon

“Assessment is a great friend.”

—Reid Lyon

“What we know is only as good as what we do.”

—Reid Lyon

Season 10, Episode 11

Learning to read vs. reading to learn, with Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D., distinguished professor emeritus from the University of Illinois at Chicago, joins Susan Lambert to distinguish between reading comprehension, learning from a text, and the process of learning to read. He compares learning to read with athletic training, explaining that just as athletes need to vary their workout intensities to maximize their strength, students need to vary their text difficulty to maximize their comprehension, reading skills, and overall learning. Together, Timothy and Susan also discuss why reading comprehension is an ethical act and the power of simply rereading to increase comprehension.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man with short gray hair and glasses smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with a yellow lightbulb icon in the corner—symbolizing the power of reading to learn and enhance reading comprehension.

Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D., is distinguished professor emeritus at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Prior to this work, he served as director of reading for Chicago Public Schools and was a visiting professor at Queens University in Belfast, Northern Ireland. He has written and edited more than 300 publications, including his book Leveled Reading, Leveled Lives: How Students’ Reading Achievement Has Been Held Back and What We Can Do About It. He is also a former president of the International Literacy Association and served on the National Institute for Literacy Advisory Board under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. He was inducted to the Reading Hall of Fame in 2007 and is a former first-grade teacher.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“ We're trying to teach kids to read, and a text that is immediately comprehensible leaves you very little to learn.”

—Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

“You can increase the learning for most people if you increase the difficulty, because people have to think about it more. They have to work.”

—Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

“Reading comprehension is not just a psychological or cognitive action—it's an ethical action.”

—Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

“We should be teaching kids with more challenging texts than we have been.”

—Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

“Athletes don't do all of their training at peak levels of difficulty; they work up to those.”

—Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D.

Season 10, Episode 10

From talk to text: How language skills shape reading success, with Charles Hulme, D.Phil., and MaryKate DeSantis

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by emeritus professor of psychology and education at the University of Oxford, Charles Hulme, D.Phil.; and founder of Left Side Strong LLC, MaryKate DeSantis. They dive deep into the critical connection between oral language development and reading comprehension. Together, they also explore exactly what oral language development is, how to screen children for deficits in oral language abilities, and the most effective strategies educators can use for intervention.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A smiling older man with short gray hair poses in front of green plants, highlighting themes of language development. A lightbulb graphic and circular frame decorate the photo.

Charles Hulme, D.Phil.

Charles Hulme is emeritus professor of psychology and education at the University of Oxford. He has broad research interests in reading, language, and memory processes and their development; and is an expert on randomized controlled trials in education. He has published widely and is in the top 2% for citations of all researchers in the field of education. He holds an honorary doctorate from the University of Oslo (2014) and is a member of Academia Europea and a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences. He was also elected a Fellow of the British Academy in 2017.

A woman with short brown hair and a black turtleneck smiles at the camera. She is framed by a circular border with a blue book icon and orange decorative lines, hinting at her passion for reading success. Bookshelves are blurred in the background.

MaryKate DeSantis

MaryKate DeSantis is the founder of Left Side Strong LLC. Her experience working in a large urban school district as a special education teacher, reading specialist, and district-wide literacy coach has fueled her passion for translational research to ensure that all children receive evidence-based instruction. Her background in teaching reading sparked an interest in researching language, literacy, and developmental trajectories. She is a full-time faculty member in the Speech and Language Literacy Lab at MGH Institute of Health Professions, and is also an ongoing-research collaborator with the BRIDGES Lab at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

She has also served as a clinician in the Neurology Department at Boston Children’s Hospital, is an adjunct professor at the Boston College Lynch School of Human Development, and is a Ph.D. student in educational psychology at the University of Connecticut.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“Reading comprehension is the process of taking the meaning from printed symbols on a page and translating them into a linguistic and cognitive code. It's making contact with the processes of language comprehension.”

—Charles Hulme, D.Phil.

“Language comprehension is really what leads us to reading comprehension.”

—MaryKate DeSantis

“We've got to start from the premise that reading is language. Without language, there would be no reading. Reading is a process that involves taking language in its written form and translating it back into its original form, which is spoken language.”

—Charles Hulme, D.Phil.

“If we go back in development, language skills appear to form the foundation for the ability to decode print, as well as the foundation for the ability to understand what is decoded.”

—Charles Hulme, D.Phil.

“Language skills are unconstrained, meaning the sky's the limit. As long as you continue to engage in any sort of way, your language skills can continue to develop throughout your lifetime.”

—Susan Lambert

“We talk about learning to read, but we also need to talk about reading to learn. A lot of what we learn in our lives is through reading, and reading is certainly a powerful driver of vocabulary and language development.”

—Charles Hulme, D.Phil.

“Focusing on language is worth the time. …  When we treat it as foundational, that's when we will give more students access to success.”

—MaryKate DeSantis

“If we want better readers, we have to grow better language users.”

—MaryKate DeSantis

Season 10, Episode 7

Syntax and comprehension, with Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by research scientist and professor Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D., who explains why syntax instruction may be the missing piece in our mission to improve comprehension outcomes for all students. Together, Julie and Susan discuss why syntax is the part of the language system that matters for comprehension, how the same systematicity and rule governance that you find in teaching phonics also exists in syntax, and how explicit syntax instruction could be the next breakthrough in evidence-based literacy education.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A person with long brown hair and glasses is facing the camera, framed by a circular border with a pencil graphic in the lower right corner, suggesting expertise in reading comprehension strategies for students.

Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D., holds joint appointments as an associate research professor at the Institute for Brain and Cognitive Sciences at the University of Connecticut; clinical assistant professor at the Yale University Child Study Center; and research scientist at the Yale-UConn Haskins Global Literacy Hub. She is also Chief Scientist at Cascade Reading. Previously, she served as a senior scientist at Haskins Laboratories for 22 years. Her deep dedication to improving reading outcomes for all children is fueled daily by her experience as the parent of a child with dyslexia, developmental language disability, dyscalculia, ADHD, and autism.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is chief academic officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“In English, syntax is word order. Syntax is the relationship between the entities in a sentence.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

“If you want to increase comprehension, you need to be explicit in syntax because that's the part of the language system that matters for comprehension.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

“Comprehension is the glue between the words. It's the process of gluing the words together, each word as you go.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

“The process itself [of comprehension] is the moment by moment, really millisecond by millisecond action of gluing words together in order to create a meaning.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

“We need to move the needle on the nation's report card.  We still have two-thirds of our students who are unable to read at what we call proficient. I think the only way that we can really get that number to be closer to the 95% that we really want is to do something new. Syntax is the new thing.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

“If somebody knew how beautiful and systematic the language was, I think you would have people rushing when they wake up to go study syntax.”

—Julie Van Dyke, Ph.D.

Season 2, Episode 7

Empowering diverse learners in math, starring Keri Brown

Alabama K–2 educator, national presenter, and curriculum author Keri Brown discusses  strategies for supporting students in the math classroom. While Keri focuses on math in the episode, many of her takeaways can be applied to all subjects. Keri breaks down the power of small-group instruction, the value of multisensory hands-on manipulatives, and the role of intervention. She also explains how to help students who may already be struggling feel comfortable and confident talking about math. Classroom Insider Eric Cross then joins host Ana Torres to reinforce the importance of implementing a routine in the classroom.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with curly hair and glasses smiles at the camera, wearing a white top and tassel earrings, in front of a light blue background—perfect for sharing teaching tips or hosting a teaching podcast.

Keri Brown

Keri Brown is an experienced K–2 educator, national presenter, and curriculum author from Alabama. She has taught both kindergarten and first grade and has also supported students through K–2 intervention. With over 17 years in education, Keri is passionate about using research-based practices, hands-on learning, and meaningful tech to support young learners. She loves helping fellow teachers through practical strategies they can use right away. You can find her sharing ideas on her website and Instagram.

Meet our host, Ana Torres.

Ana has been an educator for 30 years, working in both the K–8 and higher education sectors. She served as an administrator and instructor at various public and private colleges and universities and as a bilingual and dual language teacher, dual language math and reading interventionist, dual language instructional coach, assistant principal, and principal in K–8 schools. Ana is currently the Senior Biliteracy and Multilingual Product Specialist at Amplify, and delivers literacy and biliteracy presentations across the nation. Ana’s passion and advocacy for biliteracy and support for all students from all walks of life has led her to educate leaders, teachers, and parents about the positive impact of bilingualism and biliteracy in our world.

A woman with long dark hair and hoop earrings smiles at the camera while wearing a black blazer, standing outdoors—ready to discuss classroom challenges or share insights on her teacher podcast.
A man with short, closely-cropped hair and a trimmed beard smiles at the camera against a light gray background, ready to inspire diverse learners in the math classroom.

Meet our Classroom Insider, Eric Cross.

Eric Cross is a middle school science teacher who hopes to someday be a lifelong educator, like the guests on Beyond My Years! In each episode, Eric connects with host Ana Torres to discuss her guests’ best insights, gleaned from their long and rewarding careers in the classroom. Then, Eric talks about bringing some of their wisdom into his current classroom and busy life.

Quotes

“We start small with just talking to them, helping them figure out how to have a conversation about math. They can talk about everything else, but we have to teach them how to talk about math. We have to give them the words, give them the tools.”

—Keri Brown

“There's only so many ways you can teach the same thing. When I was teaching addition, there's only so many ways I could do it. But if that's their goal and that's what we're working on, I’ve got to try to come up with a hundred different ways to teach addition until they have mastered addition. And so you get very creative.”

—Keri Brown

“When [I] see the light bulb come on in a kid, I'm like, ‘Ah, this is why I teach.'”

—Keri Brown

“It's impactful to spend that little extra time saying, ‘Let me build some relationships and show these babies how to be students in my classroom.'”

—Ana Torres

“Predictable routines really help students feel safe, because they know what's going to happen.”

—Eric Cross

“When things are consistent and repeated, [students] know what to expect and it's not as big of a cognitive lift for them to do it. Each time eventually gets easier and you can get into the deeper learning.”

—Eric Cross

“That human aspect, that dependability, that consistency is a big, big barrier for students when they don't feel like it's there. When we can create that by creating these routines, learning happens deeper and faster.”

—Eric Cross

“Explaining requires you to juggle information in your working memory and then turn it into language.”

—Eric Cross

Season 10, Episode 3

Finding fluency at the heart of comprehension, with Doug Lemov

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Doug Lemov, former teacher and school principal, to discuss how teachers can identify when disfluency is actually the root cause for students’ struggles with comprehension—and what they can do about it. Using his new book, The Teach Like a Champion Guide to the Science of Reading, to guide the discussion, Susan and Doug address building attention stamina, the argument for reading whole books, and the value of expressive read-alouds. Finally, Doug ends the episode asserting that humans are meant to live in community, and that a deeper level of comprehension is unlocked through empathic connection to text and the experience of reading with others.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A middle-aged man with glasses and a white shirt is smiling outdoors, framed by a circular border with a blue book icon in the corner—perfect for an emergent readers or science of reading podcast profile.

Doug Lemov

Doug Lemov is a former teacher and school principal whose books describe the techniques of high-performing teachers. His best-known book, Teach Like a Champion, has been translated into more than a dozen languages. The Teach Like a Champion Guide to the Science of Reading, published in July 2025 and co-written with Colleen Driggs and Erica Woolway, looks at how cognitive science can be better applied to the teaching of reading. Doug holds a bachelor’s in English from Hamilton College, a master’s in English Literature from Indiana University, and a Master’s of Business Administration from the Harvard Business School.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer of Literacy at Amplify and host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Throughout her career, she has focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Lambert is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Lambert explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. A former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, she’s dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Person with short blonde hair, glasses, and earrings, wearing an orange jacket, smiling in front of a plain gray background—committed to literacy education and fostering background knowledge for all learners.

Quotes

“When you know the science, you should have the autonomy to make real decisions and to solve problems in your classroom. That's how education works.”

—Doug Lemov

“If you're not a fluent reader, you can't be a deep reader.”

—Doug Lemov

“The research is clear that when you start to read expressively externally, then your internal reading voice while reading silently is much more expressive and therefore infused with more meaning.”

—Doug Lemov

“Fluent reading, when it includes prosody, is meaning made audible.”

—Doug Lemov

“I just think it's easy for us to overlook how profoundly groupish we are, how we yearn for group formation, how stories, when they're told well, when they're shared, they bind us together in an experience.”

—Doug Lemov

“When we're sharing this experience that we're able to connect with the text itself, we're able to infuse some meaning through how we're reading that text. That lends us to a depth of comprehension that's really where we want any reader to get to.”

—Susan Lambert

“Comprehension just isn't coming out of a book knowing what the author said; it’s deeply connected to the content that you just experienced.”

—Susan Lambert

Season 6, Episode 12

Celebrating many meanings: Language comprehension and the importance of Black English, with Jasmine Rogers

While working with students, one educator came to a realization that put her on a path to fascinating research in the Science of Reading. In this episode, Jasmine Rogers—manager and coach with the In Schools program at the DC Reading Clinic and an early literacy intervention lead at American University—shares her story and delves into her research on dialects and best practices for structured literacy instruction. She discusses Black language and how it connects with the language comprehension strand of Scarborough’s Reading Rope. Jasmine also offers recommendations for classroom teachers who have bidialectal students.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Mujer sonriente con el pelo trenzado, enmarcada en un círculo, con iconos de un corazón y una bombilla cerca de su cabeza, sobre un fondo verde.

Jasmine Rogers

Jasmine Rogers is a manager and coach with the In Schools program at the DC Reading Clinic, serving the District of Columbia Public Schools. In this role, she manages professional development on structured literacy best practices. For nine years, she was an elementary teacher serving in kindergarten and special education as well as a reading specialist. She also mentored at the DC Reading Clinic in its 2019 inaugural cohort. She holds masters degrees in sports administration, elementary education, and special education. She is currently an early literacy intervention lead at American University, pursuing her doctorate in education policy and leadership.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is the Chief Academic Officer of Elementary Humanities at Amplify, and the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast. Her career has been focused on creating high-quality learning environments using evidence-based practices. Susan is a mom of four, a grandma of four, a world traveler, and a collector of stories.

As the host of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan explores the increasing body of scientific research around how reading is best taught. As a former classroom teacher, administrator, and curriculum developer, Susan is dedicated to turning theory into best practices that educators can put right to use in the classroom, and to showcasing national models of reading instruction excellence.

Susan-Lambert_Headshot

Quotes

“As a teacher, a Black woman, who speaks Black English, who knows the language, who is very well versed in structured literacy, if I overlooked this, if that caught me off guard a little bit, then that means that could potentially catch someone else off guard.”

—Jasmine Rogers

“With language comprehension, and considering in your native language, there may be a word that doesn’t necessarily match up with a language that you are learning in the classroom. So you have to then use your incredible cognitive skills that speak two completely different codes, comprehend what is happening, and then tie that back into, of course, the Rope to become a fluent reader.”

—Jasmine Rogers

“I consider Black English to be a very complex and complicated language…but I think typically in society it has been viewed very negatively. You can see in the media and in research where people have talked about it and used negative connotations. And I think those beliefs from society have seeped into the classroom.”

—Jasmine Rogers

“A strength of children that are bidialectal is the similar strength to students that are bilingual—they have an ability to take language that is different from theirs and translate it. That right there is an asset.”

—Jasmine Rogers

“The languages that we speak and bring from home also are not wrong. They’re simply different. And we’re gonna work together so that we take what we know differently and come together with a common language so that we’re communicating with one another.”

—Jasmine Rogers

“We have got to give our students access to this code so that they can become literate and run our society one day.”

—Jasmine Rogers

Season 3, Episode 5

Thinking is power

Join us as we sit down with Melanie Trecek-King, biology professor and creator of Thinking is Power, to explore how much of an asset science can truly be in developing the skills students need to navigate the real world. You’ll learn about “fooling” students and the importance of developing critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy in the classroom. We’ll also share real strategies and lesson examples that help build these essential skills and engage students in learning.

And don’t forget to grab your Science Connections study guide to track your learning and find additional resources!

 

Portrait of a smiling middle-aged woman with long blonde hair, wearing a black top, surrounded by a frame with colorful star and science connections icons.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with long blonde hair and a black top smiles at the camera, pictured against a blue background inside a circular frame with a cartoon flask icon—perfect for highlighting her passion for science connections.

Melanie Trecek-King

Melanie Trecek-King is the creator of Thinking is Power, an online resource that provides critical thinking education to the general public. She is currently an associate professor of biology at Massasoit Community College, where she teaches a general-education science course designed to equip students with empowering critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy skills. An active speaker and consultant, Trecek-King loves to share her “teach skills, not facts” approach with other science educators, and help schools and organizations meet their goals through better thinking. Trecek-King is also the education director for the Mental Immunity Project and CIRCE (Cognitive Immunology Research Collaborative), which aim to advance and apply the science of mental immunity to inoculate minds against misinformation.

Meet our host: Eric Cross

Eric Cross is a seventh grade science/technology teacher, grade level lead, and digital learning innovator for Albert Einstein Academies, International Baccalaureate schools. He is also an adjunct professor of learning and technology at the University of San Diego and a Google certified innovator. Eric earned a bachelor’s degree from Azusa Pacific University and a Master of Education from the University of San Diego. He had 17 years of experience working with at-risk youth and underserved populations before becoming a middle school teacher. By building relationships with students, colleagues, and the community, he has become an empowered leader in and out of the classroom. Through meaningful learning experiences centered around student agency, STEM has become accessible to students through highly engaging lesson design, thoughtful integration of digital tools, and pedagogy that engages students from all backgrounds.

Quotes

Students carry in their pocket access to basically all of humanity’s knowledge at this moment in time. The question is: do they know what they’re looking for?

– Melanie Trecek-King

Stay connected

Four women sitting at a table in a meeting, with one standing and presenting on the topic of "why is science so important," all engaged in discussion.