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!

S5-05. Math technology & hacks for math anxiety: research-based tips for caregivers

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’ve been very lucky to have so many prolific and brilliant researchers on this season of Math Teacher Lounge, and our next guest is no exception.

Listen as we sit down with Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer to discuss what causes math anxiety, math hacks, and how the right math technology can make an incredible impact in children and caregivers coping with math anxiety.

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

Marjorie Schaeffer (00:00):

I think the most important thing we know from literature right now is that high math-anxious parents, when they interact with their children, their children learn less math over the course of the school year.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:12):

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

Dan Meyer (00:15):

And I’m Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:16):

We’re onto Episode 5, Dan, of our series on math anxiety. And I wanna say it feels so lovely to imagine all of these people out there doing work to help combat math anxiety. I dunno, it just makes me feel excited about the possibilities. This work is out there; it’s happening! Kids and teachers and caregivers are being impacted by these conversations. Not just — I mean, I don’t just mean the conversations we’re having on Math Teacher Lounge, but I mean, that these researchers are doing. Like, yes, we can change this!

Dan Meyer (00:53):

This is great. Yeah. We have people who are extremely smart, who have dedicated their professional lives to studying math anxiety and resolving it. And each of them that we’ve chatted with — they share lots of ideas in common, but I’ve loved how they each have their own different flavor or take or area of emphasis on a problem that hits everybody everywhere. It’s in your home, with kids and caregivers. It’s in schools. It’s in our places of teacher preparation and professional learning. Every place is a place where we can focus on resolving issues of math anxiety. It’s exciting.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:26):

Yeah, I feel like … if there could be a course in — we all know that our teacher prep programs, in MOST teacher prep programs, there’s not nearly enough math methods or time to cover <laugh> — it’s like ready, set, go! And depending on who your mentor teacher is or what your math methods course … I mean, it can totally shape the way that you are prepared or really not prepared for going out there to teach math! And so I love that we’re having these conversations.

Dan Meyer (01:55):

What I love about today’s conversation is, one, it’s got a little bit of a technology flavor, so there’s that. But I also love, it’s got one of my favorite features about change, which is that it focuses on change to action, change to routine, rather than change to belief. Rather than saying like, “OK, everybody! Everybody stop thinking bad beliefs about math and transmitting them to your kids!” Instead, it says, “What we’ll do is just, hey, we’ll set that aside for a second and we’re gonna do a certain thing every day and watch as those actions make your beliefs change.” That to me is extremely cool. And I think it has a higher likelihood of success than just, like, me telling parents, “Hey, stop thinking these thoughts!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:37):

“Ready, set, stop being anxious!”

Dan Meyer (02:39):

Exactly. Exactly. So it’s an exciting conversation we’re gonna have here.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:43):

Right. So it’s not a, you know, “wave the wand and all of a sudden, you’re not anxious about math anymore.” But these incremental changes, these incremental conversations, this validation, can really, really impact change. I’m with you on it, Dan. I hear what you’re saying.

Dan Meyer (03:01):

To help us talk through all of these ideas and more, we’re joined by Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer, Assistant Professor of Psychology at St. Mary’s College in Indiana.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:10):

Enjoy. <Jaunty music> So, yes, Dan, we are so excited to welcome Marjorie Schaeffer. She’s Assistant Professor of Psychology at St. Mary’s College. Dr. Schaeffer, we’re so excited you’re here. Hello!

Marjorie Schaeffer (03:28):

Thank you so much for inviting me.

Dan Meyer (03:29):

Yeah. We are super-lucky to have had so many prolific and brilliant researchers about math anxiety on our show. You’ll be no exception. And every time, we love to find out about how you came to study math anxiety, which winds up being a really interesting glimpse into your backstory bio. So tell us, what is the route by which you came toward studying math anxiety?

Marjorie Schaeffer (03:51):

Oh, I love that question. I’m really interested in how the attitudes and beliefs of parents and teachers influence children, especially around math. And I actually became interested in this idea in college, when no Child Left Behind was actually first starting to be implemented in schools with high-stakes standardized testing. So much so that I actually did my thesis on this thinking about, “Do children understand the importance of high-stakes testing? Do they have anxiety around that idea?” And so that was really my first foray into the anxiety literature. And that was kind of the entry point into math anxiety for me.

Dan Meyer (04:28):

So you started by studying a very high-stakes assessment, like our students connecting with this. And the assessment is once per year. And classroom instruction is every day. So how did you move from the assessments to the everyday instruction?

Marjorie Schaeffer (04:44):

That’s a great question. So, after college, I actually taught kindergarten. And so from that, I saw the day-to-day impact of instruction and the day-to-day impact of children’s individual attitudes and beliefs. And so I really became interested in thinking about, “How do we understand why some children are really successful from the instruction happening in classrooms and why other children need a little bit more support?” And so math anxiety was one way for me to really think about the individual differences I saw in my kindergarten classroom.

Dan Meyer (05:18):

It feels like you headed … you went farther upstream, is what it feels like. Where assessment … there’s like some kind of anxiety around assessment, let’s say. And then you ventured farther up the stream to classroom instruction and then still farther into kids’ homes. It seems like your research invokes a lot of curiosity about the sources of a kind of amorphous, flowing phenomenon called math anxiety. And I’d love to hear a bit about what you know about how caregivers transfer, transmit — whatever the word is — math anxiety to their kids.

Marjorie Schaeffer (05:55):

For parents … we think that the attitudes and beliefs of parents matter. And we see that for lots of areas, not just math anxiety. But I think math anxiety, we see that really clearly. And so, we can think about it both in terms of what kind of input parents provide. So, how do families talk about math with their children? What kind of support do they provide around homework? And those are ones that I think are a little obvious. But we can also think about the offhanded comments that parents say to children when they’re talking about math generally. Right? So, we see lots of memes going around, talking about how hard math homework is. And so, I think when parents say offhanded comments like, “I’m not a math person,” or “We’re just bad at math,” that communicates values to children. I think the most important thing we know from literature right now is that high math-anxious parents, when they interact with their children, their children learn less math over the course of the school year. And this specific mechanism by which that happens is still an area for a lot of research. And so some people think it’s about input. So maybe if I’m math anxious, I’m avoiding math. And so, when I have an option to read a picture book that has math content, I focus on the colors instead. And so, my child is actually getting less math than other children. We can also think it’s about these messages that are provided. So, when I talk about math, I send the message to my child, it’s not for them, and therefore the child wants to engage in it less. And some of my work looks at things like expectations and values. So, thinking about, “Do math-anxious families actually value math less than other families unintentionally?” And so, we have some support for this idea that they expect less of their children. And so maybe when they struggle, they respond in different ways than a family who’s lower in math anxiety.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:53):

This is so fascinating to me. I also was a kindergarten teacher. And I remember a mom who just … she had such like palpable math anxiety. And during one of our conversations, she was talking about these homework sessions with her daughter. And I may have mentioned this on the podcast before. But she was talking about how every night they would sit together and they would do all this math. They’d do, like, extra math together. And it always ended in tears. And despite her math anxiety, she didn’t want her daughter to experience the math anxiety that she did. So she was trying to pile it on, so her daughter was more proficient and comfortable. And instead, it was perpetuating this anxiety about it. And so, it’s a phenomenon then, right? Even if a parent is saying, like you said, maybe completely unwilling, this mother was actually trying to do the opposite. She was trying to help, you know, imbue the love and comfort with math. Right?

Marjorie Schaeffer (09:01):

Absolutely. This is why I think in my research, it’s really important that we find low-stakes, low-stress ways for high math-anxious families to do math. They absolutely can support their children in doing math. But they need a little support. We want it to be a fun, low-stakes environment, right? So maybe that’s the connection back to high-stakes testing, that I want children to have fun math experiences.

Dan Meyer (09:28):

Yeah. This is challenging, because it feels like the more caregivers know about math anxiety, and its pernicious effects on students, and how easily transmitted it is, one could become quite anxious about math anxiety. And, you know, no one makes great decisions when they’re anxious. So if I’m recalling our various episodes we’ve done, we’ve heard from people say, “Well, you need to validate students’ math anxiety. This is not something to just ignore or brush past. But also, not validate it in a way that says, you know, ‘This is OK and generational and inevitable.’” Which presents parents with a very thin path to follow, it seems like. So I love what you’re saying about how we gotta just de-stress the whole process.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:11):

You’re avoiding the whole, “I wasn’t a math person either” kind of thing. <laugh>

Dan Meyer (10:15):

Right, right, right. Yeah. So I’d love to know more. We’re excited about the technology that you have studied and helped develop, presumably, called Bedtime Math, anapp for caregivers. And I’d love to know more about what that is and what it offers parents who know enough about math to know that they don’t want to transmit math anxiety to their children, but also want to support. So what does that offer them?

Marjorie Schaeffer (10:39):

So Bedtime Math is an app. It’s freely available on iTunes or the Apple Store or Google Play. And what it’s designed to do is to provide a nightly topical passage. So one of my favorites is the one about Groundhogs Day. And so it talks a little bit about the history of Groundhogs Day, and then it asks math-related follow-up questions. So starting at a preschool level, going through late fifth grade. And it’s really meant for parents to pick the one that meets their children where they are. And so the preschool-level question asks children to pretend to be a groundhog and walk to the left and walk to the right. So a skill that families might not think about as being math, but we actually think that IS part of understanding math. Understanding left and right directionality. And then the next question can ask questions like, “If it took the groundhog three seconds to climb out of the hole, and then two more seconds to see its shadow, how much time did it take all together?” So a simple addition problem, but it’s phrased in a fun way. And so the hope is that for high math-anxious families, these interactions are fun and playful. They don’t look like fights over homework. They’re just conversations that families can have around topics that are naturally interesting to children. And our hope is that when families have lots of these positive low-stakes interactions, they actually can see that we can talk about math in unstressful ways. In lots of ways, right? We can also do this at the grocery store. We can also do this while we’re cooking in the kitchen. It doesn’t just have to be fights over homework.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:14):

And I actually have the Bedtime Math — one of the Bedtime Math books. And I was so excited to find out that there’s an app. And I think one of the things that I loved about the book is that these are invitations, right? They’re exactly that. Low pressure <laugh>, and they’re invitations to have a conversation. And if we were just to tell parents, “Oh, just count!” or, “Hey, just count wherever you go!” You know? No. It’s, in a way, I think, like you said, it’s retraining the parents on what math could look like. Like, “Oh, I didn’t even think we could just kind of have this conversation and we’re actually doing math together.”

Marjorie Schaeffer (12:55):

Yes, absolutely. I absolutely agree. We want it to be fun and playful and not stressful. And we want it to also be things that are meaningful to children’s lives. So these are topics children are interested in. It’s not that we are using flashcards or making children practice math facts over and over again. These are things children should wanna do that can naturally fit into a child’s routine. So almost all families read books before bed, and what we hope is that math can also be a part of the nighttime routine.

Dan Meyer (13:27):

There’s something really subtle here going on that I just wanna name and ask a question about. First of all, it’s cool that you started with studying high-stakes stuff and now you are developing low-stakes stuff. And I’m really curious what makes a thing low-stakes? Like, a few things I’m hearing from you is that there’s, like … I have a small child that I read literature to on a nightly basis. And I feel very anxiety-free doing that. And it’s almost as though, because each of the — tasks is the wrong word for this, but experiences — involve some reading, it puts me, the parent, in a mode that is comfortable and familiar to me. I’m curious: Are there other, as you design, what, one per day for a year? All these different experiences. What are some of the principles that you lean on that help make a thing low-stakes for kids and for parents?

Marjorie Schaeffer (14:17):

Yeah, that’s a great question. So one thing we wanted to be really intentional about is that our app doesn’t look like a lot of traditional apps. There isn’t noises that go off. You don’t enter an answer. And so one of the things that we thought made it low-stakes is that while there is a right or wrong answer — there is a correct answer — we aren’t giving children upsetting feedback. Instead, what we wanna encourage families to do is, if you struggle to remember how many seconds it took the groundhog to come out of the hole, you can work through that with a parent. So it doesn’t feel like you’re getting negative feedback; you’re being told you’re bad at math; you did it wrong. Instead, you’re just getting natural support moving forward. And so that’s one thing we wanted to be really intentional about, was that it wasn’t going to be a negative experience for children. And we are trying to build on all of the positive interactions families are having around nightly book reading. So many ways this can look very similar. You get to read another story that’s topical and hopefully interesting. And then do these little questions together. And so for a lot of families, their children don’t actually really look at the question. It almost feels like the parent is just asking them on their own. Like, they just came up with it. They just wanted to know what would happen to the groundhog. If there were three more groundhogs? How many groundhogs would we have all together? Not like it’s gonna be like homework or other parts.

Dan Meyer (15:38):

So my understanding is that there isn’t a blank into which people type a number in, press “submit” for evaluation, receive the red X, the green check. That’s a key part of the design here.

Marjorie Schaeffer (15:50):

Yes, absolutely. And for research purposes, we would’ve loved to know what families were saying. But we think it’s really important that it’s fun, interactive, that families are working together to get to the right answer, that it’s not a test for children.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:03):

In your research, when you were — maybe you could walk us through the study a little bit. But I’m also curious if you heard from parents that it was carrying over beyond the bedtime routine. Because I would imagine, if I am building these skills and reading these questions and learning that I could talk to my kid like this about math in a fun way, that’s gonna happen then, like you said, when I’m in the grocery store. Or when I’m waiting in line for at the bank. Or whatever, you know? People go into banks now still, right?

Marjorie Schaeffer (16:35):

Yeah, absolutely. So in our study, we recruited almost 600 families and we randomly assigned them. So they had an equal chance of getting both our math app and what we call our control app. And that’s really just a math app without the math. We think of it as a reading control app. And that’s because we wanna make sure that families are having a similar experience, that it’s not just that having high-quality, fun interactions with your child is actually impacting children’s math achievement. And so what we then did is followed those children over the course of early elementary school. And so we worked with them in schools in the fall and spring of first, second, and third grade, really to look at their math learning. And so what we find is that children of high math-anxious adults, when they have the reading app, so what we think of as what’s happening in the real world, we see that really classic gap between children of high math-anxious adults and children of low math-anxious adults. So if you have a high math-anxious parent, you’re learning about three months less math over the course of first grade. But for children who receive this math app, we see this gap as closed. Those children look no different than a low math-anxious parent. And so that’s leading us to think that we’ve helped families talk about math in fundamentally different ways. We did a little bit of just talking to families to see a little bit about what might be going on. And a lot of families do report exactly what you’re describing, where they say this did help them talk about math in different ways they were doing it other times.

Dan Meyer (18:10):

That’s a really extraordinary study design. I don’t know … I love that you folks gave the control group not nothing. Like it’s possible that just parents and kids bonding over a thing regularly would be enough to provoke some kind of academic gain. But you gave the control group a thing that had them interacting socially, bonding, and still this large common gap between high-anxious and low-anxious parents, their kids shrunk together. Is that what I’m gathering here?

Marjorie Schaeffer (18:41):

Yeah, absolutely. So we’re basically seeing we can no longer, when we look at children’s data, say that parents’ math anxiety explains individual differences. So these children look really similar. They’re learning more than children who has a high math-anxious parent and just got our reading control app.

Dan Meyer (19:01):

just diving into the study a little bit more here, what is the time commitment? Or, did you guide parents to say, “All right, we’re gonna do this do this delightful story about a badger for an hour”? Or did people do it for five minutes? And what was the time commitment, roughly, for people?

Marjorie Schaeffer (19:17):

So we tell families to do it however they see fit. Because it is an app, we are able to get some sense of how long, and we are talking about three to six minutes for many families. For a lot of families, they’re reading a paragraph, the paragraph and a half, and then answering one or two questions. They’re not going through every possible question. They’re just doing a little bit, really meeting their kids where they are.

Dan Meyer (19:39):

Roughly how many times per week was that?

Marjorie Schaeffer (19:41):

So we asked families to do it as much as it fit. But we’re seeing about two and a half on average in the first year. And so families are fitting it in a couple of nights a week. It’s not every night.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:52):

So what it sounds like you’re saying is what really was powerful about this app is that it was the space and time and prompts between the caregiver and the child, that chance to really sit down and have some of these meaningful and positive math interactions. How did it shift those relationships?

Marjorie Schaeffer (20:12):

So one of the things I think that makes the app effective is the changing of expectations. After a year, families are really using the app a lot less. And I think that’s OK, that they have found other ways to incorporate math into their lives. And we find that we don’t see an impact on their math anxiety, that they aren’t becoming less math anxious from this experience. Which I think makes sense, because they have had a lifetime of math anxiety. But we do see a change in parents’ expectations and value of math. So they expect their children will be better at math, and they also report that math is more important in their children’s lives. And so I think that’s an important part of it, which is, we can change these values for families, even if we aren’t able to change the math anxiety of the adults in children’s lives.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:01):

I want to for a second before — because I’m loving this idea of the app, and I’m excited to find out more ways to cultivate these conversations in my home and also share this with other folks. Because even folks who don’t even maybe realize they have math anxiety … like you said, so often it’s unconscious. So often we’re putting these little snippets into our everyday conversation, like, “Oh yeah, I’m not a math person.” And we don’t even realize how much is impacting our kiddos and ourselves, right? So I am really curious: What do you think … in your research, what were some other takeaways that you feel like are really strategies that we can think about for combating math anxiety in general?

Marjorie Schaeffer (21:47):

So I’m particularly interested in thinking about how math-anxious adults can help tone down their anxiety so that they can have high-quality interactions with their children, that they interact with. And so one of the big takeaways for my research, I think, is that math-anxious families can help their children with math. They just need support. And so I think there are lots of ways for that support to look like. One, I think it can be an app, but I also think reading a little bit about math can be really helpful. So it’s not new. So the first time you aren’t thinking about some of these ideas is as your child has their homework open in front of you. And so you can process your own feelings separately before you have to do it with a child. I also think reminding parents that math is everywhere and that math is actually lots of things that we all love to do. Math isn’t just calculus. Not that calculus isn’t wonderful. But that math is measuring, math is counting ducks at the park. Math is talking about how many times did I go down this slide. And talking about math in this way, I think reminds families that they are great at that. That even if maybe they’ve had bad math experiences before, they can do math. Especially the way their preschool or early childhood, early elementary school student needs them to. And I think that can then set the foundation for being really successful later.

Dan Meyer (23:13):

So is your research then, your subsequent studies, your line of inquiry, is moving more towards how to support parents, then? Is that what I’m hearing?

Marjorie Schaeffer (23:22):

Yeah. So I’m really interested in both understanding how the math anxiety of parents and teachers influences children. And so math anxiety is really common and we know that it’s particularly common in early elementary school teachers. And so it’s very likely that children are interacting with a highly math-anxious adult. And so I’m really interested in thinking about how we can support those individuals in doing it. And so both, I think, things like Bedtime Math, which provide fun, unscripted ways to do that, but I’m also interested in the teacher equivalent. So, thinking about whether having things like a math coach can help teachers have more positive experiences with math. So if you see someone else play math games with your students, can that help you do it as well?

Dan Meyer (24:09):

It makes me wonder a lot about an app for teachers or an app for parents, one that’s not designed to be co-consumed with kids and their parents. But what that would look like … yeah, that’s really interesting.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:21):

If we have a parent who, let’s say they have a third grader, fourth grader, fifth grader, or a middle schooler, right? Outside of early education. And they say, “OK, but what do I do? I’m with my kiddo; I don’t remember this math.” And they’re realizing that their anxiety may be influencing their kiddos’ disposition of mathematics, Or maybe they’re just in the midst of the battle <laugh>. What would you say to those folks, especially if it’s math that maybe they’re not comfortable with?

Marjorie Schaeffer (24:56):

One, I think we should like tone down the stress, right? Remind ourselves that it’s homework and homework feels really high-stakes, but these other outcomes are really high-stakes too, right? And so I’m really interested in the idea that can we help parents feel more comfortable about math by watching their own children teach it to them. So what’s a concept that the fourth grader actually feels really good about? And can they remind their parent how to do it? Can, together, they problem-solve the math homework? And so it’s not just on the parent to give the child the right answer. We know that’s a recipe for communicating some negative things about math. But instead, help the parent-child pair figure it out together. So what are some resources we can do? Can we look it up on the internet together? Can we write an email to the teacher together? Can we think about what are other problems that maybe we know how to do, and therefore we can use that same model here? So I want parents to feel like they are not solely responsible for it. That they can help figure it out with their child together. And so it’s a fun interaction.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:02):

I love that. I love that.

Dan Meyer (26:03):

Yeah. Yeah. That’s wonderful. Yeah. A conviction that I have, and I think it’s true, is that any math that we’re learning at middle school, the attraction can be dialed down to a degree that a very small child, or a parent who has a very small child’s understanding of math, can appreciate. So instead of calculation, estimation. Instead of proof, just make a claim about something. And it makes me wonder about a companion to the work that’s happening in schools that parents feel inadequate to support, that students might not want to teach their parents. But which they could both, on a daily basis, say, “Here’s a way we can engage in this at a level that is comfortable to both of us.” Just dreaming out loud here. No question asked. No response needed. I just love your work. And made me wonder about that. Can you let me know your thoughts about technology? It is very rare that we have someone on the call who is an academic and very well-versed in research, but who also is published not just in in papers and textbooks, but also in digital media. It’s consumed by lots of people. So I am trusting that you have opinions about how math looks in technology. And I wonder if you’d offer some thoughts about how it goes, right? How it goes wrong from your own eyes.

Marjorie Schaeffer (27:14):

OK. That’s a great question. I think that we need more research. I first wanna say that I think that technology has really exploded in the last few years. How children have access to technology and screen times has really changed. And what we need is high-quality research happening. That said, I think that all of the things we know from child-development research still apply to technology. And so we know that children learn best when they are engaging in interactions with their parents. And so when families can use technology together, or at least can talk about what’s happening, it can be really effective. I also think technology, especially math apps, are best at teaching concrete skills with very clear answers. So I think practicing math facts is a great use of technology. So I love that Sushi math app where you solve multiplication problems and then get to quickly pull the sushi off the cart, right? But for higher-level questions, where we’re thinking about word problems or where what we’re helping to teach students is complex thinking, apps have a harder time doing that. Because students can often figure out the answer without engaging in the thinking that we are hoping that they’ll learn. And so I think technology absolutely has a piece. I think technology is helpful for parents. I think the logistics of helping parents live their lives is a good reason to use technology. But I think we need to be conscious of what it’s replacing. And so I think a world in which we think fourth graders can learn math only from apps is not realistic. But absolutely apps can be a great supplement to what’s already happening in the classroom.

Dan Meyer (28:56):

Yeah, that’s super-helpful. We have done a lot of work in digital curriculum here at Amplify, and often face the question on a daily basis, “Should this math be digital or on paper? Should we have the students stand up and talk or type something?” And those decisions are way too crucial and way more sensitive than a lot of the app-based education gives credit to. So appreciate your perspective there.

Marjorie Schaeffer (29:22):

OK. And I don’t think there’s one answer, or one answer for all classrooms. I think it’s like always a balancing act. I do think that one of the reasons our work is successful is because the parent-child interaction. And we want parents to learn from these experiences. And I think the same thing is true for for teachers.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:41):

Dr. Schaeffer, thank you so much for being with us today and for sharing about your research, and again, for inviting us to reconsider ways that we can develop a more positive relationship with math. And that parent or caregiver or teacher relationship with a child, we’re seeing just how incredibly impactful that is. And I really appreciate your work and your voice on this. Thank you so much for your time.

Dan Meyer (30:07):

Thank you.

Marjorie Schaeffer (30:08):

Thank you for having me.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:12):

Thank you again, Dr. Schaeffer, and thank you all for listening to our conversation. You can check out the show notes for more on Dr. Schaeffer’s work and to see a link to the app that we shared about Bedtime Math.

Dan Meyer (30:25):

Please keep in touch with us on Facebook at Math Teacher Lounge Community, and on Twitter at MTLShow.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:32):

We would love to hear … you’ve been listening to this series; we’re dipping our toe into all these aspects of math anxiety. Is there something that you’re still wondering about? Something you wanna share about your own story with math anxiety?

Dan Meyer (30:43):

And if you haven’t already, if this is your first exposure to the Math Teacher Lounge podcast, please subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge, wherever you get your fine podcast products. And if you like what you’re hearing, please rate us! Leave us a review. You’ll help more listeners find the show.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:01):

And let a friend know. But you know, it’s, it’s nice and cozy here in the Lounge, right? There’s no pressure. We’re hanging out. It’s all about learning. We’re learning together. We’re glad you’re here and we want others in your community to join us in the Lounge as well. You can find more information on all of Amplify’s shows at our podcast hub. Go to amplifycom.wpengine.com/hub. Next time on Math Teacher Lounge, we’re gonna be chatting about where we are today that we weren’t a few months ago in this topic.

Dan Meyer (31:31):

We’ll be chatting about this last series about math anxiety, and trading our favorite insights and observations from the run of the season.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:41):

I just love this series, Dan. And thanks, all, for listening. We really appreciate having you in the Lounge.

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 Marjorie Schaeffer says about math

“We want it to be a fun, low-stakes environment, especially in high-stakes scenarios like testing. We want children to have fun math experiences.”

– Marjorie Schaeffer

Assistant Professor of Psychology at Saint Mary’s College

Meet the guest

Marjorie Schaeffer is an assistant professor of psychological sciences at Saint Mary’s College. She received her Ph.D in developmental psychology from the University of Chicago. Marjorie is interested in the role parents and teachers play in the development of children’s math attitudes and performance. She is specifically interested in the impact of expectations and anxiety and on children’s academic performance. Her work has been published in outlets including ScienceJournal of Experimental Psychology: General, and Developmental Science.

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!

S5-02. 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!

Creating lasting change in K–5 math and literacy instruction

Two women seated at a table engage in a lively conversation. One is using a laptop, likely discussing innovative teaching practices. Bookshelves filled with resources for empowering students are visible in the background, perhaps hinting at their dedication to star awards in education.

Transforming math and literacy education takes more than just tips and tricks—it requires vision, commitment, and the right support. Whether you’re rethinking early literacy skills instruction, refining math core curriculum, or fostering a culture of collaboration, you need strong leadership and proven strategies for real change to occur.

“Sustained, meaningful change doesn’t happen overnight,” said Kymyona Burk, Ed.D., a senior policy fellow at ExcelinEd and the keynote speaker at our recent Leading With Vision symposium. “It requires commitment, collaboration, and a clear vision for supporting both educators and students.”

At the symposium—which included keynotes, panels, and math and literacy tracks—education experts from across the country shared experiences navigating instructional shifts, leading curriculum implementation, and setting schools up for success. From building buy-in to making data-driven decisions, their actionable insights can empower you with the knowledge and tools to create lasting change in your district.

Read on for a recap of the core presentations. You can also watch or listen along—and, for extra credit, download the workbook to deepen your learning.

Opening keynote: Key Factors for Successful Transformation in Literacy and Math

Kymyona Burk, Ed.D.
Senior Policy Fellow, ExcelinEd

In her session, Kymona Burk made the case that real student learning progress in literacy and math doesn’t come from policy alone—it requires systemic, research-based change in classrooms. Too often, schools focus on interventions for struggling students instead of strengthening core instruction to prevent gaps in the first place. She pointed to Mississippi’s success in narrowing achievement gaps as proof that evidence-based teaching, teacher support, and family engagement drive meaningful, lasting improvement.

A key factor in that success, she argued, was a firm commitment to the Science of Reading. “We have decades of research on how children learn to read, and we can’t afford to ignore it,” she said.

Burk also stressed math’s similarities to literacy when it comes to effective teaching methods. Just as students need structured, research-backed reading instruction, they also need math teaching and instructional materials that build deep understanding rather than rely on rote memorization. Achieving this, she said, requires strong materials, better teacher training, and a commitment to using data to refine strategies. The path to better outcomes isn’t a mystery—what’s needed is leadership and persistence.

Key takeaways:

  • Tier 1 instruction is the foundation. Schools must prioritize high-quality core instruction to prevent learning gaps.
  • Literacy and math both need urgent attention. Math reform has lagged behind literacy efforts, but both require evidence-based teaching and structured support.
  • Teachers need more than just training. Professional development must be paired with coaching, collaboration, and access to the right materials.
  • Sustained effort leads to results. Mississippi’s success proves that achievement gaps can be closed with consistent investment in people, resources, and accountability.

Leadership Lessons Learned in Baltimore City Schools That Impact Change Everywhere

Janise Lane
VP of Customer Transformation, Amplify; former Executive Director of Teaching and Learning, Baltimore City Schools

Janise Lane’s talk centered on Baltimore City Schools’ multi-year effort to implement a more effective literacy curriculum, highlighting the importance of managing both the logistical and emotional aspects of change. While the district had strong, committed educators, student performance remained stagnant, prompting a curriculum audit and a shift toward evidence-based instruction.

Lane described how to build buy-in and sustainability by ensuring that change is not dictated solely by district leadership. “We had to shift from a system where decisions were made at the top, to one where teachers, families, and community members were true decision-makers,” Lane said.

She also emphasized the need to recognize and address resistance. “Everybody approaches change differently, and it’s our job as leaders to attend to all of those emotions,” Lane said. The key to success, she noted, is creating structured pathways for implementation while remaining adaptable and open to feedback and real classroom experiences.

Key takeaways:

  • Balance structure with flexibility. A clear plan is necessary, but it must adapt based on feedback, data, and the realities of implementation.
  • Small wins build momentum. Celebrating early progress helps shift mindsets from skepticism to belief in the change.
  • Trust and transparency matter. Educators need to see that leadership is engaged, responsive, and committed to making change work for everyone.

Making Math People: Key Shifts in How We Think of Math Assessment

Patrick Callahan, Ph.D.
Educator; Founder, Math ANEX

During his talk, Patrick Callahan emphasized the ways that asset-based assessments measure not just what students don’t know, but the depths of their mathematical thinking. Instead of relying on traditional multiple-choice tests, his approach encourages open-ended responses, allowing teachers to analyze how students arrive at their answers.

Callahan noted that by looking beyond correctness to understand reasoning, teachers can better target instruction. “If all I see is that 37% of my students got an area problem right, I might think I need to reteach area,” Callahan explained. “But if I analyze responses, I see that some kids are correctly multiplying but misunderstanding overlapping rectangles, while others are actually calculating perimeter instead. That tells me exactly where to focus my instruction.”

His research also shows a correlation between students who demonstrated conceptual understanding (such as interpreting remainders in division problems) and higher performance on standardized tests—evidence that fostering deep thinking supports both engagement and achievement.

Key takeaways:

  • Assessments should focus on thinking, not just accuracy. Open-ended questions provide deeper learning opportunities.
  • Targeted teaching saves time. Knowing why students struggle prevents unnecessary reteaching.
  • Classroom discussions boost comprehension. Encouraging students to explain their thinking deepens understanding.

Creating a Supportive Environment for Educators During Times of Instructional Change

Ricky Robertson
Educator; author; consultant

“The number one influence on team effectiveness is psychological safety,” Ricky Robertson said during his symposium session. “Not how talented the individuals are, but how they interact with one another.” His talk focused on how the knowledge that one can speak up without fear of punishment or humiliation affects school culture, educator well-being, and student success, citing research such as Google’s Project Aristotle that demonstrates how high-performing teams thrive not on individual expertise but the quality of interactions among team members.

He also noted that toxic workplace dynamics—such as fear-based leadership, cliques, and bullying—contribute to burnout, disengagement, and resistance to change. Stressing that “strategies don’t transform schools, systems do,” he shared case studies of schools that changed their culture by fostering open communication, restructuring leadership teams, and implementing clear decision-making processes. Creating a safe environment isn’t just about being nice, Robertson said. Robertson noted that creating a safe environment isn’t just about being nice, but about building systems that allow educators to collaborate, support one another, and better serve their students.

Key takeaways:

  • Psychological safety boosts performance. Schools that report a high sense of psychological safety see increased collaboration, innovation, and teacher retention.
  • Structured collaboration matters. Schools with clear communication protocols and leadership structures create more productive teams.
  • Change starts with educators. Supporting teachers’ well-being and professional growth is the foundation for student success.

More to explore

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

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.

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!

Making reading comprehension connections

A smiling girl in a green shirt sits at a desk with an open book, holding a pencil, highlighting the importance of literacy benchmarks. A yellow background with a book icon is shown behind her.

Comprehension isn’t just a process, or just a product—it’s both. And connecting reading and understanding is what most teachers are working on every day.

That fundamental connection was the focus of our recent Science of Reading Webinar Week: Comprehension Connections—Building the Bridge Between Reading and Understanding, a five-day, expert-filled series that unpacked what really drives comprehension, from early decoding to middle school mastery.

Here’s a quick look at what you’ll learn when you watch—and a few ideas you can use right away.

Day 1: What Is Reading Comprehension, Anyway?

Speaker: Susan Lambert, Ed.D., Chief Academic Officer, Literacy, Amplify; Host of Science of Reading: The Podcast

“Reading comprehension is more than just language comprehension. It’s language comprehension on the page, which makes it much more complex.” — Susan Lambert, Ed.D.

If you ask ten teachers to define comprehension, you might get twelve answers. Lambert opened the week by grounding everyone in the Science of Reading, including the Simple View of Reading and the Reading Rope. Skilled reading, she reminded viewers, is the result of multiple strands—decoding, language comprehension, and knowledge—woven together over time.

The takeaway? The most effective approaches don’t teach comprehension strategies—such as “find the main idea”—in isolation. Rather, they connect word recognition to meaning through rich texts, conversation, and writing. Whether you’re teaching second-grade reading comprehension or sixth-grade reading comprehension, students need the same thing: a clear path from sounding out words to making sense of ideas.

Day 2: Comprehension and Knowledge Building: A Two-Way Street

Speakers: Sonia Cabell, Ph.D., Sigmon Endowed Professor of Reading Education, Florida State University

HyeJin Hwang, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota Twin Cities

“Better background knowledge leads to improved reading comprehension, which in turn enables readers to learn more from text, thereby building additional knowledge.” —HyeJin Hwang, Ph.D.

In their session, Sonia Cabell and HyeJin Hwang explored one of the clearest findings in reading research: Comprehension and knowledge develop together. Cabell began by explaining how comprehension (including oral language, background knowledge, vocabulary, syntax, and verbal reasoning) forms one of the essential strands of the Reading Rope.

Students can’t activate knowledge they don’t yet have. Teachers need to help them build it early, and intentionally. Cabell’s research found that integrating literacy and content instruction produced gains in vocabulary and content knowledge.

Likewise, Hwang’s two large-scale longitudinal studies showed that better knowledge instruction leads to better reading, which leads to even more knowledge. These findings held true across languages and grade levels, underscoring the universal value of content-rich instruction.

Classroom takeaways:

  • Plan literacy units around connected science or social studies topics to build coherent knowledge.
  • Use content-rich interactive read-alouds with discussion before, during, and after reading.
  • Ask inferential comprehension questions (“Why?” “How?”) that require students to connect ideas using their own words.
  • Encourage quick writing or drawing tasks that help students show what they’ve learned.

Day 3: Where and How to Measure Comprehension to Drive Improvement

Speakers: Danielle Damico, Ph.D., Executive Director of Learning Science, Amplify

Gina Biancarosa, Ed.D., Ann Swindells Chair in Education, University of Oregon

“Reading comprehension is both a process and a product.” —Danielle Damico, Ph.D.

Too often, comprehension is measured only as a finished product—how well students answer questions after reading—without revealing how they built understanding along the way. This session explored what comprehension actually involves: reading words accurately, understanding their meaning, applying background knowledge, and making inferences. As researcher Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D., has described, these interconnected skills all work together as students learn to read.

Biancarosa showed how looking at comprehension as a complex process helps teachers see student thinking in action. She described the major types of inferences—lexical, bridging, gap-filling, and causal—and the importance of understanding how students connect ideas and construct meaning.

Try this:

  • Treat comprehension as ongoing thinking, not a one-time test score.
  • Use brief think-alouds or class discussions to get a look at how students connect ideas.
  • Match assessments to the precise question you’re trying to answer.
  • Let assessment guide instruction—data should lead directly to next steps.

Day 4: Comprehension in Middle School: More Important Than Ever

Speaker: Deb Sabin, Chief Academic Officer, Amplify ELA

“Writing done right encodes knowledge. And discourse done right gets into the realm of higher-order thinking.” —Deb Sabin

By the time you’re teaching fourth-grade reading comprehension through sixth-grade reading comprehension, decoding should be automatic. At this stage, the upper strands of the Reading Rope—vocabulary, background knowledge, and syntax—move to the forefront. In this session, Deb Sabin highlighted how comprehension in middle school relies on academic knowledge, disciplinary vocabulary, and structured discourse—and how it truly blossoms when reading, writing, and speaking reinforce one another.

Classroom moves that help:

  • Pair writing with reading: Even short, text-based responses consolidate knowledge in long-term memory.
  • Use structured discussion (“accountable talk”), where students cite text evidence and build on one another’s ideas.
  • Center rich, grade-level texts that challenge thinking and vocabulary.

Speaker: Julie A. Van Dyke, Ph.D., Clinical Assistant Professor, Yale University Child Study Center; Research Scientist, Yale-UConn Haskins Global Literacy Hub

“Teach phonics for decoding. Teach syntax for understanding.” —Julie A. Van Dyke, Ph.D.

In the final presentation of the series, Julie Van Dyke explored an often-overlooked element of comprehension: syntax—the way words combine to create meaning. Van Dyke argued that syntax is to comprehension what phonics is to decoding.

She illustrated how the Science of Reading and the Reading Rope locate syntax within the language-comprehension strands—critical to understanding who did what to whom in complex sentences. Explicitly teaching sentence structure helps all learners, including multilingual/English learners, access higher-level meaning.

Simple practices can make a difference:

  • Have students paraphrase tricky sentences. (Starter question: “Who’s doing the action?”)
  • Pull strong sentences from your class texts to show how structure shapes meaning.
  • Encourage students to mirror those structures in their own writing.

What linked all five sessions together? The understanding that comprehension develops when teachers connect the code, the language, and the knowledge. Whether students are decoding in second grade or crafting essays in sixth, they thrive when we help them move from reading to understanding—step by step, strand by strand.

Watch all five on-demand recordings.

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.

Top 10 Science of Reading podcasts to get you started

Since 2019, Science of Reading: The Podcast has delivered the latest insights from researchers and practitioners in early reading. Hosted by Amplify’s Chief Academic Officer Susan Lambert, each episode welcomes a renowned leader in the education and literacy community, explores a timely topic related to the Science of Reading, and offers instructional advice to educators implementing evidence-based practices in their schools.

New to the podcast? Here are 10 popular episodes to acquaint yourself with the Science of Reading. Listen, enjoy, and subscribe — we have new episodes every other Wednesday!

S1-E1: Natalie Wexler on “The Knowledge Gap”

Susan hosts Natalie Wexler for a deep dive into her latest book, The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System—And How to Fix It, and a discussion of the lack of equity in reading education among students, the benefits of knowledge-rich curriculum inside and beyond the classroom, why it’s important to build background knowledge while teaching foundational skills, and why professional development doesn’t seem to be making a difference and how it can be improved.

S1-E3: Emily Hanford on reporting on education and the Science of Reading

Susan sits down with Emily Hanford, education reporter and host of the Education Post podcast, to examine the big takeaways from her experience reporting on dyslexia and the patterns that emerged in her investigation; why reading instruction isn’t more aligned with the Science of Reading; and the evolution of whole language, balanced literacy, and phonics instruction.

S1-E8: Tim Shanahan on evidence-based literacy practices

Reading expert Tim Shanahan discusses his view on teaching reading, including an explanation of the four crucial things you need to teach reading, and what it means to really do a “close read” in literature.

S3-E1: Dr. Jane Oakhill on Scarborough’s Reading Rope

Dive into the first episode of our Deconstructing the Rope series as Dr. Jane Oakhill, professor of experimental psychology at the University of Sussex, provides an overview of Scarborough’s Reading Rope. She also emphasizes the importance of inferencing in comprehension, why the Simple View of Reading is still relevant almost 40 years later, and how each element of the Rope comes together to deconstruct the complexity of reading.

S3-E3: Dr. Louisa Moats on decoding

Join Dr. Louisa Moats, President of Moats Associates Consulting, as she unwinds decoding, a strand of Scarborough’s Reading Rope. In the third episode of our Deconstructing the Rope series, Louisa highlights the significance of decoding in the Science of Reading and discusses the value of becoming students of our own language. She also explains the reciprocal relationship between decoding and encoding and why both are essential to provide effective phonics instruction to children in the classroom.

S2-E7: Sonia Cabell on research, comprehension, and content-rich literacy instruction

Join Sonia Cabell, Assistant Professor of Education at Florida State University, as she shares findings from her research trials on content-rich literacy curricula and whether activating students’ background knowledge alongside explicit phonics instruction is more effective than traditional approaches. She also explains what constitutes “compelling evidence” in the Science of Reading and why students need to interact with both written and spoken language while learning to read.

S3-E5: Dr. Bruce McCandliss on sight recognition

Join Dr. Bruce McCandliss, Professor at the Graduate School of Education of Stanford University, as he unwinds sight recognition, a strand of Scarborough’s Reading Rope. In the fifth episode of our series, Bruce explains the role of sight and word recognition in the Science of Reading and highlights the importance of the rapid integration of print, speech, and meaning. He also encourages listeners to be cognizant of the ever-changing technological learning environment while nurturing young readers and writers.

S2-E1: Dr. LaTonya Goffney on a district-wide SoR adoption

Join Dr. LaTonya Goffney, Superintendent of Schools for Aldine Independent School District in Texas, as she recounts her two-year journey with her team of district educators to adopt a new early literacy curriculum. Hear how they successfully challenged the traditional adoption process, studied the science of teaching reading, analyzed student data and experiences, and developed a district-wide set of beliefs and expectations.

S3-E7: Maria Murray on The Reading League’s Defining Movement

In this special episode, Dr. Maria Murray, President, and CEO of The Reading League analyze the intricacies of literacy instruction and shares common misconceptions that educators have about the Science of Reading. She also explains why the Science of Reading: A Defining Movement coalition was founded: the belief in a clear understanding of what the Science of Reading is and what it is not, in order to promote the proper use of instructional practices aligned with its findings.

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.

How teachers can address math anxiety

How teachers can address math anxiety

No one is born knowing the quadratic formula, or how to measure a triangle—math needs to be taught.

Likewise, no one is born a “math person”—or not a math person. And no one is born with math anxiety.

“Children don’t come with math anxiety,” says Dr. Rosemarie Truglio, senior vice president of curriculum and content for Sesame Workshop and a guest on Math Teacher Lounge. “Math anxiety is learned.” That’s actually good news because it means math anxiety can be unlearned, too. We can teach students (and even teachers) how to overcome it. In this post, we’ll cover some helpful learning strategies, teacher tips, and supports for caregivers.

Anxiety in—and beyond—the math classroom

First, let’s review what math anxiety is and is not.

Math anxiety is more than just finding math challenging, or feeling like you’re not a math person. Dr. Gerardo Ramirez, associate professor of educational psychology at Ball State University, defines it as “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.” Here’s what else we know:

  • Causes: Math anxiety is not correlated with high or low skill or performance. For students who’ve been pressured to excel, math anxiety comes with the fear of not meeting expectations. For students who historically haven’t done well in math, the anxiety comes with the assumption they’ll do poorly every time. Other triggers include a mismatch between learning and teaching styles that can lead to struggle, or false cultural messages like “girls aren’t good at math.”
  • Consequences: People who suffer from math anxiety may deliberately avoid math, the consequences of which are obvious and far-reaching: not learning math at all, thus limiting academic success, career options, and even social experiences and connections. (This webinar mentions real-life—and relatable—examples of adults affected by math anxiety.)
  • Prevalence: Math anxiety affects at least 20 percent of students, and 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 as well. Luckily, those teachers and parents can also play a key role in helping students (and maybe even themselves) get more comfortable with math.

Addressing math anxiety in the classroom

Math anxiety can arise from the contexts and cultures in which students encounter math, so it makes sense that we can also create conditions that can help reduce it—and even prevent it from taking hold. Here are some key strategies for helping even the most math-anxious students thrive:

  • Invite explicit conversation about math anxiety. In this webinarMath Teacher Lounge podcast co-host Bethany Lockhart Jones recommends having open and direct conversations with all students about how doing math makes them feel. “The more you know about your students’ ‘math stories,’ the more you can help them,” she says.
  • Build a positive, supportive, and collaborative math community where different learning styles and incorrect answers—often fuel for math anxiety—are considered part of the learning process. Embracing and working from wrong answers encourages students to focus on the “how” of math. Students feel more comfortable asking questions, taking risks, and making mistakes (as well as learning from them).

How do you build a supportive environment in your math classroom?

  • Cultivate a growth mindset. Create a culture where mistakes are not just acceptable, but inevitable—even welcomed. Encourage perseverance and persistence. Emphasize that being challenged by a math concept doesn’t mean a student is inherently bad at math or just can’t do it.  It means only that they can’t do it yet.
  • Encourage collaboration. Promote a culture of cooperation and teamwork by incorporating group activities, peer support, and class discussions into your lessons.
  • Play. Game-ifying problems and introducing friendly competition builds camaraderie and helps students find shared joy in math—a win-win!
  • Give students plenty of time. Alleviating the pressure of time constraints allows students to think more deeply, take brain breaks, make fewer rushed errors, and develop a sense of control and confidence. Here are some ways to build time into your math lessons:
    • Allow students ample time to think when you ask them questions.
    • Allow students to work on assignments in class with support and take them home to finish if they need more time.
    • Consider giving tests and quizzes in two parts and allowing students to complete them over multiple days.
  • Create a culture of revisions. Allowing students to revise homework assignments and tests/quizzes for partial credit will remind them that learning math is a process, not a mandate to get everything right the first time. This will help them deepen their understanding by learning from and correcting their errors—and remind them that mistakes are part of growth.
  • Use intentional language. The phrase “This is easy” might sound encouraging, but anxious students may hear it as “You should be able to do this.” Instead, use supportive, objective language such as “This problem is similar to when we…” or “Try using this strategy.”

Addressing math anxiety at home

Caregivers may be accustomed to reading to students at home, but sitting together and doing math? Probably less so. Some caregivers may even inadvertently perpetuate math anxiety—or the ideas that feed it—by repeating some of the associated stereotypes and misconceptions. (“Sorry, kiddo, grandpa’s not a math person.”)

Teachers can address this by sending materials home to support caregivers in engaging kids in math. Math games, for example, offer a fun, accessible opportunity for home practice—and they can even be played at bedtime, along with story time.

In general, teachers can also encourage caregivers to:

  • Use and point out their use of math in the real world wherever possible.
  • Help with math homework as much as possible.
  • Use intentional, positive phrasing about math—including about their own use of it.

Teachers have the ability to reduce math anxiety and help students unlearn the stereotypes associated with it by building a positive math ecosystem. They can build a positive community in their math classroom, set caregivers up for success in supporting students at home, and even shine a light on their own relationship to math.

To learn more, tune in to Season 5 of Math Teacher Lounge, dive into our math webinars, and read the rest of our math blog.

Don’t miss the finale of Math Teacher Lounge

Just like certain functions and number sequences, even the most successful podcasts reach a natural end. And that’s true of Math Teacher Lounge. After six seasons and more than 40 episodes, co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer are heading off to work on other exciting projects.

So let’s take a look at the podcast’s farewell episode, as well as some highlights from earlier seasons.

Highlights from this math podcast

On the final episode of Math Teacher Lounge, our hosts walk through the past ten episodes on math fluency. They highlight key conversations on defining and assessing fluency, fluency development in a bilingual math classroom setting, and the potential pitfalls of relying too heavily on so-called fake fluency.

“I think every guest has answered a question that we’ve had about fluency and then also opened up new areas of investigation for us,” says Dan. “Whether that’s thinking about community more deeply through fluency or assessment or classroom practices, all these different folks offered us a glimpse into their expertise and then pointed at paths towards more learning.”

Spanning six seasons, the podcast has reached thousands of educators while exploring a wide range of topics including the joy of math, math anxiety, and (of course) math fluency. Guests have included Amplify’s Jason Zimba, Reach Capital’s Jennifer Carolan, and Baltimore County Public Schools’s John W. Staley, Ph.D.

Some of the most popular episodes included:

Investigating math anxiety in the classroom (S5E1) with Gerardo Ramirez, Ph.D., associate professor of educational psychology at Ball State University. Ramirez helped our hosts and listeners understand what math anxiety is and is not, what impact it has on learning, and what we can do about it.

Building math fluency through games (S6E7) with University of Louisville professor Jennifer Bay-Williams, Ph.D., who—in a special live recording at NCTM 2023—showed how games can bring both fluency and joy into the math classroom.

Cultivating a joy of learning with Sesame Workshop (S5E3) with Dr. Rosemarie Truglio, senior vice president of curriculum and content for Sesame Workshop. Dr. Truglio shared how to cultivate a growth mindset in young children and point them toward academic achievement and long-term success.

Professional development—and more—to look forward to

Bethany and Dan will continue working on a host of other exciting projects, including webinars and conference appearances. On March 12, Dan will also participate in the Amplify 2024 Math Symposium: a free, virtual, five-hour event that will help educators strengthen math instruction, bolster student agency, and build math proficiency for life.

The following key Math Symposium sessions (featuring your favorite Math Teacher Lounge guests and host Dan Meyer) will help you learn even more about those popular topics in math:

Dan Meyer

How to Invite Students into More Effective Math Learning | 3:15 p.m. EDT

Gerardo Ramirez Ball State University

How Student’s Personal Narratives Shape Math Learning | 12:15 p.m. EDT

Jennifer Bay-Williams University of Louisville

Bringing Math to Life: How Games Build Fluency and Engagement | 1:00 p.m. EDT

Akimi Gibson Sesame Workshop

Developing Young Children’s Identities and Competencies as Mathematicians | 4:00 p.m. EDT

Check out the full agenda and sign up today. All sessions will be recorded and attendees will receive a certificate of attendance.

Back-to-school teacher resources

The good news? There are TONS of free back-to-school resources available to dedicated teachers who want to start the year off right. How do you sift through every educators’ resource to find the ones that are right for you and your students? We’re here to help!

Role of teachers during back to school: What the research tells us

Recent studies, such as one published in Educational Leadership (2022), emphasize that the first few weeks of school are critically important in establishing trust and setting behavioral norms. A good start can lead to higher engagement and better academic outcomes. 

A 2021 Gallup survey on student engagement found that teacher enthusiasm and planning have a long-lasting impact on student motivation and achievement.

And according to a 2021 study in the Journal of School Psychology, students who start the year with clear objectives and a positive mindset are 30% more likely to meet or exceed benchmarks by the end of the school year. 

This research proves something you already know all too well—that the role of an educator isn’t just to impart knowledge, but to get students ready to learn all year long.

How Amplify can help with free resources for teachers

Whether you’re teaching Amplify in your classroom or onboarding our programs in your school or district, we’re here to support you.

Teacher Central: Educators can visit start.amplify.com/teaching/ to explore a variety of helpful tools and resources, including product highlights, guides to getting started, grade-level resources, and on-demand training videos.

A diverse array of downloads: While we used to drop resources into our free downloads library one at a time, you can now access the whole library all at once! The get-to-know-you activities activities and name tags will help you build a connected classroom at the start of the year—and the seasonal, cultural, and program-specific offerings will help you plan out the rest. 

Product-specific guidance: Program-specific guidance: Our webinars, hosted by Amplify experts and tailored to each individual product, will help you level up your implementation and start the new year off right. Topics include Amplify Science, mCLASS® DIBELS® 8th Edition and mCLASS Lectura, Amplify CKLA and Caminos, Amplify ELA, Boost Reading, and Boost Lectura. Learn more and register here to access them on demand. 

A professional community, 24/7. Join our Facebook groups for peer engagement and weekly giveaways during the back-to-school season. Our groups include: Amplify CKLA, Amplify ELA, Amplify Science, and Boost Reading + mCLASS

Brand new podcast! Ana Torres knows firsthand how hard it is to be a teacher—that’s why, as the host of our new podcast Beyond My Years, she’s seeking out seasoned educators to share their stories and insights from inside the classroom. They’ll make you cry, make you laugh, and may even change the way you think about teaching. 

Log into your Amplify platform today to start preparing for the upcoming school year!

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. 

Season 9, Episode 10

Phonology as a settled science, with Jane Ashby, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Jane Ashby, professor in the Reading Science doctoral program at Mount St. Joseph University. The two define the concept of “settled science” as a jumping-off point before digging into phonology and the argument for not always basing your teaching practice on the newest research. Dr. Ashby touches on the impact of phonology on comprehension, the Matthew Effect, and why the term “instant words” is more accurate than “sight words.” You’ll walk away from this episode with two practical exercises Dr. Ashby recommends for teaching students to transfer oral segmenting and blending to reading and writing tasks.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Jane Ashby, Ph.D.

Jane Ashby, Ph.D.

Dr. Ashby’s reading journey started 30 years ago. She pursued an Ed.M. at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, then taught adult learners who struggled with reading. This led her to deepen her instruction skills by studying the Orton-Gillingham approach at Massachusetts General Hospital. She supported teachers and students facing reading disorders in the Columbus area, then returned to school to study how readers get the words off the page during silent reading. She earned a doctorate in psychology from the University of Massachusetts, and in 2009, joined the Psychology Department at Central Michigan University, where her eye movement lab investigated the role of speech processes in silent reading. She coauthored the book Psychology of Reading (2012) as well as several papers examining the role of phonology in silent reading. During her sabbatical, Dr. Ashby supported teachers in Vermont who were developing more effective literacy practices. In her spare time, she enjoys reading and outdoor adventures.

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.

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 store a vocabulary word, it's not enough to have the meaning. You have to have the entry for it, and the entry for it is the sound form of the word.”

—Jane Ashby

“The greatest gift you can give a kid is letting them know that you see that they're special and that they have something unique that they bring to the world. But the second piece is really, can you help them become a confident, independent reader?”

—Jane Ashby

“ The practitioner doesn't necessarily want to follow the latest research, because you don't know if the latest research is going to replicate or not. Is it going to hold up over time or not? If you always follow the latest research, you can find yourself zigzagging a lot in your practice.”

—Jane Ashby

“There's a good 10 to 20 years of solid work that needs to be done just implementing what we already know from research, what is already the settled science.”

—Jane Ashby

Season 5, Episode 5

Math technology & hacks for math anxiety: research-based tips for caregivers

We’ve been very lucky to have so many prolific and brilliant researchers on this season of Math Teacher Lounge, and our next guest is no exception.

Listen as we sit down with Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer to discuss what causes math anxiety, math hacks, and how the right math technology can make an incredible impact in children and caregivers coping with math anxiety.

Listen today and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!

A smiling woman with long brown hair, wearing a red top, framed by a circular border with a geometric pattern background.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with long brown hair and a red top smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with geometric accents.

Marjorie Schaeffer

Marjorie Schaeffer is an assistant professor of psychological sciences at Saint Mary’s College. She received her Ph.D in developmental psychology from the University of Chicago. Marjorie is interested in the role parents and teachers play in the development of children’s math attitudes and performance. She is specifically interested in the impact of expectations and anxiety and on children’s academic performance. Her work has been published in outlets including ScienceJournal of Experimental Psychology: General, and Developmental Science.

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

We want it to be a fun, low-stakes environment, especially in high-stakes scenarios like testing. We want children to have fun math experiences.

—Marjorie Schaeffer

Stay connected!

Season 8, Episode 9

Knowledge building can’t wait, with HyeJin Hwang

Dr. HyeJin Hwang is an assistant professor and literacy researcher whose research interests revolve around reading comprehension and content learning in K–12 settings, particularly for multilingual students. In this week’s episode of the podcast, HyeJin Hwang talks with Susan Lambert about background knowledge (what it is, how it’s built, and more), the importance of broad knowledge, the connections between knowledge and vocabulary, and unit planning rather than lesson planning. English wasn’t Dr. Hwang’s own first language, and her research on supporting multi-language learners is informed by her own experiences learning English and later teaching English as a second language.  Whether you’re just starting to establish a solid foundation on knowledge building or you’re looking to explore the topic from new angles, this episode is the one to listen to.

Meet Our Guest(s):

HyeJin Hwang, Ph.D.

HyeJin Hwang, Ph.D.

HyeJin Hwang is an assistant professor in the department of educational psychology at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. She earned her Ph.D. in Educational Studies (Literacy, Language, and Culture) at the University of Michigan and worked as a postdoctoral scholar at the Florida Center for Reading Research. Her research interests revolve around reading comprehension and content learning in K–12 settings, particularly for multilingual students. Hwang’s work has been published in research journals such as Reading Research Quarterly, Scientific Studies of Reading, and AERA Open, as well as practitioner journals such as The Reading Teacher  and Reading in Virginia. Her work has been supported by the American Educational Research Association, the President’s Postdoctoral Fellowship Program at the University of Minnesota, and the American Psychological Association Division 15 (Educational Psychology).

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

“Knowledge building cannot wait. …Start from the beginning of schooling, from early grades. Multilingual students and monolingual students, they both need support developing knowledge and literacy skills.”

—HyeJin Hwang

“In knowledge building, we usually like to go for cultivating in-depth knowledge. That means interconnected ideas need to be told throughout multiple lessons, multiple classes, rather than planning individual separate lessons.”

—HyeJin Hwang

“When readers have good broad knowledge, prior knowledge, then it is more likely the readers can recall text information ideas, and they can make better inferences about missing ideas in text.”

—HyeJin Hwang

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 2, Episode 4

Phone policies and the science of self-control, starring Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

Angela Duckworth, Ph.D., the New York Times bestselling author of Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance, joins Ana Torres to discuss school phone policies and what the science of self-control can tell us works. In this episode, Angela highlights the many complexities surrounding student cell phone use in schools and why there is a need to conduct research, such as her “Phones in Focus” study, to look at which phone policies are actually yielding the best outcomes. She also outlines the limitations of “growth mindset” and "simply trying hard," and instead suggests four ingredients that set young people up to reach their goals. Finally, Ana and Classroom Insider Eric Cross reflect on Angela’s insights, and Eric shares the strategies he plans to implement to provide mentors to his students.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with long dark hair smiles at the camera, wearing a patterned top and a small necklace, against a light-colored, blurred background—she shares insights from the Science of Self Control on her teaching podcast.

Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

Angela Duckworth is the Rosa Lee and Egbert Chang Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, faculty co-director of the Penn-Wharton Behavior Change for Good Initiative, and faculty co-director of Wharton People Analytics. A 2013 MacArthur Fellow, Angela has advised the U.S. Department of Education, the World Bank, NBA and NFL teams, and Fortune 500 CEOs. Angela completed her undergraduate degree in neurobiology at Harvard, her Master of Science with Distinction in Neuroscience at Oxford University, and her Ph.D. in psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. Angela’s TED talk is among the most viewed of all time. Her book Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance is a #1 New York Times bestseller.

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

“It is not just trying hard that makes you successful. You need to be set up in a situation that helps you like an ally, as opposed to fighting you like an enemy.”

—Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

“If you put temptations very close to you…it's much more psychologically potent than if you put it away where you cannot see it or you cannot touch it, or both.”

—Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

“The strategy for regulating yourself that is the most successful for people of any age tends to be situation modification. That is not relying on willpower, but deliberately placing things either farther or closer, depending on whether you want to do them more or do them less.”

—Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

“Aside from parents, there's nobody more important than teachers in the life of a kid. They are looking to you as a role model.”

—Angela Duckworth, Ph.D.

“That science of self-control—we have to actually teach that to our students. That is not something they come out of the womb knowing how to do.”

—Ana Torres

“Culture is this living thing, and it can shift from classroom to classroom, and it shifts from year to year. And so, building that is just as much of an art as it is a science, but it's so critical.”

—Eric Cross

“I believe that all students can be successful in a classroom given the right support, but students have to believe that as well. So we have to be genuine and authentic when we show up in that way, because they know when you're not.”

—Ana Torres

Season 6, Episode 4

From the community, for the community: Grassroots organizing, with Naomi Peña & Akeela Azcuy

Community and education activist Naomi Peña and clinical psychologist Dr. Akeela Azcuy knew that, as moms of struggling readers themselves, they had the opportunity to advocate for not only their own children but all children. These two leaders and changemakers founded Literacy Academy Collective with the goal of one day creating a stand-alone New York City public school devoted to educating children with language-based learning disabilities as well as struggling readers. In this episode, our guests share their own families’ experiences with dyslexia, how that impacted their activism, and how listeners at home can effect grassroots change in their own communities.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Dos retratos circulares conectados por un icono de corazón; la izquierda muestra a una mujer con cabello rizado sonriendo, y la derecha muestra a una mujer con cabello lacio y lápiz labial rojo, ambas defensoras de la concientización sobre la dislexia en

Naomi Peña

Naomi Peña is a community and education activist. She is currently president of New York City District 1, Community Education Council.

 

Akeela Azcuy

Akeela Azcuy has her doctorate in clinical psychology. She is also a board member for Dyslexia Alliance for Black Children and a trustee of the Winward School and Institute.

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

“Leaders tend to forget that you get more out of parents if you collaborate with them, if you're honest.”

—Naomi Peña

“With the level and degree of training, understanding, and privilege that I had, it was still—and still continues to be—an overwhelming battle to get your child the services that they need.”

—Dr. Akeela Azcuy

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!

Literacy Essentials, Episode 3

Science of Reading Essentials: Dyslexia

In this special dyslexia-focused Essentials episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert pulls from past episodes to summarize everything you need to know about dyslexia, from experts Emily Lutrick, Ed.D.; Nadine Gaab, Ph.D.; Tim Odegard, Ph.D.; Sally Shaywitz, M.D.; and Francisco Usero-González, Ph.D. You'll also hear first-hand accounts from young people about their personal experiences with dyslexia, reading, and the education system. Even if you have little prior knowledge of dyslexia, you’ll walk away from this episode with a foundational understanding of the condition, including what it is, what causes it, how to identify it, the importance of early screening, how it is a continuum, methods for intervention, and more.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man wearing a dark suit, white shirt, and striped yellow tie, smiling at the camera in front of a neutral background.

Francisco Usero-González, Ph.D.

Francisco Usero-González, Ph.D., is a multilingual and education consultant specializing in culturally and linguistically responsive approaches for Hispanic bilingual students. Through his scientific training and teaching experience—nationally and internationally—he has increased his knowledge of biliteracy program design and implementation, participated in national and international educational conferences, and published several papers in international educational journals.

A young woman with curly hair smiles at the camera, wearing a maroon top, hoop earrings, and a necklace, against a light gray background.

Margaret “Margo” Malaika Weaver

Margo Weaver had unplugged from school and retreated into the corners of her environment until her diagnosis of dyslexia helped her make sense of things. She went from being on academic probation to regularly landing on the Honor Roll and Dean’s List. She became a two-time California All-State Softball player and now plays for Bowie State University in Maryland, where she studies Digital Art Animation.

A man with glasses, a beard, and a mustache smiles at the camera. He is wearing a white shirt and is set against a plain light gray background.

Elijah Valencia

Elijah Valencia’s story is a testament to the power of perseverance and an indictment of systems intended to help young people prepare for society. Without the ability to read well, Elijah was unable to keep his life on track. While incarcerated, he was diagnosed with dyslexia and given the support needed to develop his reading skills. Upon release, he earned an associate’s degree and has become a youth counselor and hotel manager.

An older woman with styled brown hair, wearing a bright blue jacket and pearl earrings, smiles at the camera against a light background.

Sally Shaywitz, M.D.

Sally E. Shaywitz, M.D., is Audrey G. Ratner Professor in Learning Development at Yale University and co-director and co-founder of the Yale Center for Dyslexia & Creativity. A leading expert on dyslexia, she has authored over 350 scientific papers, delivered a Congressional keynote, and was elected to the National Academy of Medicine.

A man with short blond hair and blue eyes wearing a suit and white shirt, seen in a close-up portrait with a neutral gray background.

Tim Odegard, Ph.D.

Tim Odegard, Ph.D., holds the Katherine Davis Murfree Chair of Excellence in Dyslexic Studies at Middle Tennessee State University. He leads the efforts of the Tennessee Center for the Study and Treatment of Dyslexia, serves as editor-in-chief of Annals of Dyslexia and consulting editor of the Journal of Learning Disabilities, and is a former editor at large for Perspectives on Language and Literacy. He is also a reading therapist, having completed a two-year dyslexia specialist training program at Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children in Dallas.

Nadine Gaab, Ph.D.

Nadine Gaab, Ph.D., studies typical and atypical learning trajectories from infancy to adolescence, with a special emphasis on language, reading, and literacy development, and the role of the environment in shaping these trajectories. Her work is at the intersection of developmental psychology, learning sciences, neuroscience, educational technology, and educational policy within a learning disability framework. She’s interested in multifactorial frameworks of learning differences with an emphasis on early identification, and “preventative education.” One key aspect is the translation of research findings to address contemporary challenges in educational practice and policy.

A woman with long brown hair, wearing white-framed glasses and a red top, is smiling at the camera against a blurred indoor background.
A young person with wavy, light brown hair and a white hoodie smiles at the camera indoors.

Hadyn Fleming

Hadyn Fleming is a student featured on Science of Reading: The Podcast who openly shares his experiences growing up with dyslexia. In his episode, he discusses his journey to becoming a confident reader and debunks common dyslexia myths. His story offers valuable insight into the profound impact educators can have on a student’s success and self-belief.

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

“The knowledge has been out there for decades, and still we have so many students in classrooms who are not identified and not supported. And it's a shame, because the impact of living with dyslexia—especially when it's not identified—can be profound.”

—Susan Lambert

“What we know is prevention is always the best, and you can't prevent somebody from being dyslexic. But what you can do is you can prevent them from having compounding struggles in learning how to read.”

—Susan Lambert

“When you have something, but it doesn't have a name, it leads to anxiety. So when you know that you have something and it has a name, that makes such a difference.”

—Sally Shaywitz, M.D.

“You don't wanna just screen the whole world or your whole district and then not do anything about it. Good screening needs to be followed by a good evidence-based response to screening.”

—Nadine Gaab, Ph.D.

“In this world of intervention, we need to take responsibility for getting students the intervention that they need to have, so they're not leaving us in this next grade and the next grade and the next grade still being non-readers.”

—Susan Lambert

“That old mindset of having something or not having something, black or white, is a real hindrance to actually making sure that we have protections for all students, regardless of if they fit this ‘you have dyslexia or not.’ We have a structural and systems challenge now.”

—Tim Odegard, Ph.D.

“Kiddos start to learn to read, and just at a basic preK level of understanding, you can identify some level of risk there and intervene appropriately. You can screen early and you can intervene just as early, to help close those gaps.”

—Emily Lutrick, Ed.D.

Special miniseries, Episode 4

Practical strategies for multilingual learning, with Diane August, Ph.D.

In this episode, Diane August, Ph.D., shares her journey and expertise supporting multilingual learners, focusing on her transition from a Spanish language teacher to a widely recognized expert in literacy and language acquisition for multilingual students. August recounts her initial teaching experiences, her realization of the need for better support for language development, and her subsequent pursuit of a Ph.D. and further research efforts to deepen her understanding of second language acquisition and content integrated language teaching. August emphasizes the foundational importance of supporting multilingual learners through asset-based approaches, bilingual programming, and research-based instructional strategies, advocating for educational policies and practices that recognize and leverage the linguistic and cultural assets of multilingual learners from the very early grades all the way through the later grades.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Diane August, Ph.D.

Diane August, Ph.D.

Diane August, Ph.D., is a principal at D. August and Associates, where the team works to improve educational outcomes for multilingual learners through technical assistance to states and districts, experimental research, and policy work. August is currently a co-principal investigator at the Center for the Success of English Learners, one of two federally-funded centers focused on outcomes for secondary level multilingual learners. She is also a co-principal investigator for a National Professional Development Program grant funded by the Office of English Language Acquisition.

Her prior positions include managing researcher at the American Institutes for Research, senior research scientist at the Center for Applied LInguistics (CAL), and senior program officer at the National Academy of Sciences. She also worked as a classroom teacher, school administrator, congressional legislative assistant, grants officer for the Carnegie Corporation of New York and Director of Education for the Children’s Defense Fund. She received her Ph.D. in education and completed a postdoctoral fellowship in psychology at Stanford University, and has been published widely in journals and books.

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

“We found there is no indication that bilingual instruction impeded academic achievement, either in the native language or in English. What we observed on average, [was] that kids that were in bilingual programs did a lot better in literacy.”

—Diane August, Ph.D.

“There's some sounds in English that aren't present in a first language. Or there are orthography letters that sound different in one language versus the other. So you just have to realize you have to take into consideration the kid's language background when you're teaching foundational skills.”

—Diane August, Ph.D.

“We develop kids' oral language when they're older in conjunction with teaching them to read and teaching them content area knowledge. You can't not do that from the beginning, you have to support kids in foundational reading skills.”

—Diane August, Ph.D.

“Second language learners also come with a lot of knowledge in their first language, which is really important to consider. It's not like they don't have background knowledge.”

—Diane August, 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.

Season 9, Episode 12

Explicit instruction of academic language, with Adrea Truckenmiller, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Adrea Truckenmiller,  associate professor of special education and school psychology at Michigan State University. Their conversation starts with defining academic language and breaking it down on the level of the word, the sentence, and full text. Adrea then touches on topics such as informational vs. narrative text structure, morphological complexity, and effective writing assessment. She also gives advice on how to implement explicit instruction on informational text and academic language, and details a few examples of what it can look like in the classroom. Adrea ends by discussing her passion for special education and encouraging educators to get involved.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Smiling person with shoulder-length hair against a blurred outdoor background, encircled by a graphic with a light bulb icon at the bottom right.

Adrea Truckenmiller

Adrea Truckenmiller, Ph.D., NCSP, is an associate professor of special education and school psychology at Michigan State University. She’s the lead author of the Writing Architect, a digital tool that combines an innovative curriculum-based measure of informational writing with instructional practices grounded in research to meet the diverse needs of students in grades 3–8. She also co-created MSU’s master’s degree program for leadership in studying and implementing the Multi-Tiered System of Supports framework. Prior to her time at MSU, Truckenmiller was a researcher at the Florida Center for Reading Research. There, she directed the development of screening and diagnostic assessments for reading and writing, as well as state-wide professional development to accompany them and inform differentiated instruction. She has published more than 40 articles and was awarded more than $5 million in external funding for her research on reading and writing development. She serves as associate editor for the Journal of School Psychology and the Elementary School Journal and sits on the editorial board of five other journals. Learn more at atruck.msu.domains.

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.

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 we're thinking about teaching academic vocabulary, of course in the context of content, [it’s important to note] that it's not just a one time around, that sometimes we have to layer that instruction for deeper and deeper and deeper meaning.”

—Susan Lambert

“ Academic language is really a new language for everyone to learn.”

—Adrea Truckenmiller

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, Episode 12

Filling in the gaps with inferences, with Kristen McMaster, Ph.D.

In this episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Kristen McMaster, Ph.D., Guy Bond Chair in Reading and professor of special education in the Department of Educational Psychology at University of Minnesota. Together, they explore how reading comprehension isn’t just about what’s on the page—it’s also about what’s not there—and share practical insights on how to support students in developing inference skills. Susan and Kristen also discuss the dual processes of activation and integration when making inferences; the distinction between teaching students to process text actively versus teaching students to apply comprehension strategies; and different types of inferences, including causal, bridging, and elaborative.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with straight light brown hair and blue glasses smiles at the camera, framed by a circular border featuring a blue book icon—a fitting image for someone passionate about teaching comprehension strategies and building student skills.

Kristen McMaster

Kristen McMaster, Ph.D., is the Guy Bond Chair in Reading and professor of special education in the Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota (UMN). She was a special education teacher in Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools before earning her doctoral degree from Vanderbilt University and joining the UMN faculty in 2002. Her research focuses on developing reading and writing assessments and interventions, and supports teachers’ use of data to individualize instruction. She has extensive experience providing professional development to practitioners and consulting with researchers and policymakers in Minnesota as well as nationally and internationally.

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

“Inferencing is really central to comprehension. We wouldn't comprehend if we didn't make inferences.”

—Kristen McMaster

“I would just encourage teachers not to underestimate the importance of supporting even the inferences that might seem obvious to us.”

—Kristen McMaster

“Very broadly speaking, comprehension is how we make sense of the world around us. We're constantly taking in information. We see things; we watch things; we hear things; we read things. And as that information comes in, we are constantly integrating it with what we already know.”

—Kristen McMaster

“Good comprehenders are often making very automatic inferences that they don't even realize.”

—Kristen McMaster

“It helps to explicitly teach what an inference is in language that students will understand.”

—Kristen McMaster

“It can be much more helpful to ask questions during text if you want to influence that mental picture that the child is building. If you wait until after they've read the text, they've already built that representation and it may or may not be quite what you were hoping they would build.”

—Kristen McMaster

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 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 7, Special Episode

The Right to Read: Live from Plain Talk, with Kareem Weaver

After three years and more than 3 million downloads, Science of Reading: The Podcast recently conducted its first ever taping in front of a live audience. The recording took place on March 9, 2023, in New Orleans at the Plain Talk About Literacy and Learning conference. Susan Lambert was joined by none other than Kareem Weaver, NAACP activist, whose first appearance on this podcast remains an all-time favorite among listeners. This time around, Kareem gave Susan a behind-the-scenes look at his involvement with the new film: “The Right to Read”. Kareem also offered insights into his latest work with NAACP. Plus, Kareem addressed the topic of accountability: can we make the changes we need to make when it comes to literacy instruction without holding some people accountable?

Meet Our Guest(s):

Retrato de Kareem Weaver, un hombre calvo con barba, vestido con traje y corbata, en un marco ovalado con símbolos decorativos en la parte superior e inferior.

Kareem Weaver

Kareem Weaver is a co-founder and executive director of FULCRUM, which partners with stakeholders to improve reading results for students. He is the Oakland NAACP’s 2nd vice president and chair of its education committee; his advocacy is featured in the film “The Right to Read.” Mr. Weaver previously served as New Leaders’ executive director of the Western Region and was an award-winning teacher and administrator. He has undergraduate degrees from Morehouse College and a master’s in clinical-community psychology from the University of South Carolina. Mr. Weaver believes in the potential of all students, the brotherhood of man, and the importance of service above self. His educational heroine, for literacy instruction, is the late Marva Collins.

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.

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

“Hope it's not a strategy. It's great to have hope, but that can't be the strategy for our kids and our systems that serve 'em.”

—Kareem Weaver

Season 5, Episode 3

Cultivating a joy of learning with Sesame Workshop

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!

Portrait of a smiling woman with short hair, wearing a suit, set against a blue background within a white circular frame on a patterned turquoise and black background that subtly incorporates sesame workshop themes.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A person with short dark hair smiles at the camera, wearing a dark blazer and light top, set against a blue background with graphic elements—capturing the spirit of growth mindset and innovative learning strategies.

Rosemarie T. Truglio

Dr. Rosemarie T. Truglio 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).

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

“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

Stay connected!

Season 7, Episode 7

Debunking the "gift" of dyslexia in children, with Dr. Tim Odegard

When we surveyed listeners, more than half of respondents said they wanted more conversations about teaching students with dyslexia. That is why Susan is joined by Dr. Tim Odegard from Middle Tennessee State University. Odegard is a professor of psychology and holds the Katherine Davis Murfree Chair of Excellence in Dyslexic Studies. As someone with dyslexia himself, Odegard brings a unique perspective to this discussion where they debunk the idea of “the gift of dyslexia,” discuss neurodiversity, and talk about what needs to be done to change the system.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Dr. Tim Odegard

Dr. Tim Odegard

Tim Odegard, Ph.D., is a professor of psychology and holds the Katherine Davis Murfree Chair of Excellence in Dyslexic Studies at Middle Tennessee State University. He also leads the efforts of the Tennessee Center for the Study and Treatment of Dyslexia. He serves as editor-in-chief of Annals of Dyslexia, as a consulting editor of the Journal of Learning Disabilities, and is a former editor at large for Perspectives on Language and Literacy. In addition to being a research scientist, Tim is a reading therapist, having completed a two-year dyslexia specialist training program at Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children in Dallas.

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.

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

"We need to change the dialogue and say, this is what's right for all kids. And this isn't about just dyslexia, that's the byproduct of doing what's right for all children."

—Tim Odegard

Season 7, Episode 8

Writing your way to better reading, with Steve Graham

When it comes to literacy education and cross-domain learning, it’s critical to understand the relationship between reading and writing. In this episode, Susan talks to Steve Graham all about writing—and how it can be used to strengthen literacy. Graham served as chair of the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guides on elementary and secondary writing, and is the current Regents and Warner Professor at Arizona State University. Together, he and Susan discuss ways to support student writing, hindrances to writing development, the importance of teaching handwriting skills, and why writing is essential to any literacy program.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Steve Graham

Steve Graham

Steve Graham is the Regents and Warner Professor in the division of Leadership and Innovation at Arizona State University’s Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College. For 42 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. 

He 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 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.

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

"Kids need to write, they need to write for a variety of purposes. And they also need to write for real reasons, for real audiences."

—Steve Graham

Back to School '23, Interlude Episode 3

Growing up with dyslexia

In this episode, in honor of Dyslexia Awareness Month, we highlight Kareem Weaver’s daughter Margo and nephew Elijah—both of whom learned they had dyslexia later in life. After many struggles in school, Margo was diagnosed with dyslexia in high school; Elijah was diagnosed with dyslexia only while he was incarcerated. Margo and Elijah discuss the impact of their diagnoses as Kareem reflects on their stories and shares lessons learned for families and caregivers. Margo and Elijah also share their advice for educators and other young people about types of dyslexia.

Meet Our Guest(s):

SoR_Podcast-Page-S7EI3-80

Kareem Weaver

Kareem Weaver is a co-founder and executive director of FULCRUM, which partners with stakeholders to improve reading results for students. He is the Oakland NAACP’s second vice president and chair of its education committee; his advocacy is featured in the film The Right to Read. Mr. Weaver previously served as New Leaders for New Schools’ executive director of the Western Region and was an award-winning teacher and administrator. He has an undergraduate degree from Morehouse College and a master’s in Clinical-Community Psychology from the University of South Carolina. Mr. Weaver believes in the potential of all students, the brotherhood of man, and the importance of service above self. His educational heroine for literacy instruction is the late Marva Collins.

 

Margaret “Margo” Malaika Weaver

Margo Weaver had unplugged from school and retreated into the corners of her environment until her diagnosis of dyslexia helped her make sense of things. She went from being on academic probation to regularly landing on the Honor Roll and Dean’s List. She became a two-time California All-State Softball player who now attends and plays for Bowie State University (MD), where she studies Digital Art Animation. She can be seen in the documentary, The Right to Read.

 

Elijah Valencia

Elijah Valencia’s story is triumphant. It’s a testament to the power of perseverance and an indictment of systems intended to help young people prepare for society. Without the ability to read well, Elijah’s life went off-track. While incarcerated, he was diagnosed with dyslexia and given the support needed to develop his reading skills. Upon release, he earned an associate’s degree and has become a youth counselor and hotel manager. He’s also started a family.

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.

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

"It made me realize I wasn’t the problem; something was wrong with me. I just had a little bump in the road that was making it just a little bit harder for me.”

—Margo Weaver

“It shouldn’t take having to go to jail to get what you need to learn how to read. That’s the bottom of it.”

—Kareem Weaver

“Just try to take a deep breath in and ask questions.”

—Elijah Valencia

“We just wanted answers and to know what's going on, because I know she's brilliant. I know she's smart.”

—Kareem Weaver

“Even when they were trying to help me … it's like they were expecting me to be learning at everybody else's pace.”

—Elijah Valencia

“Real talk as a parent: We got to own up to stuff.”

—Kareem Weaver

“When a kid can't read and life gets a hold of you, it's like a cycle. Next thing you know, you find yourself in situations that you never would have imagined.”

—Kareem Weaver

“Most parents are overwhelmed and they need an ally in the building.”

—Kareem Weaver

“I just wish somebody really kind of sat with me and told me that I wasn't stupid and that I was okay.”

—Margo Weaver

Season 8, Episode 1

Knowledge and comprehension: Never one without the other, with Reid Smith and Pamela Snow

In the premiere episode of Season 8 of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by guests Reid Smith and Pamela Snow to lay the groundwork for a season entirely centered on knowledge and knowledge-building. Reid and Pamela—of the SOLAR Lab at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia—recently co-authored (along with many others) a review of the literature on background knowledge and literacy. In this discussion, they share what they learned, including some surprising takeaways. This episode examines the  complexity of building background knowledge, the important role it plays in literacy, and the reasons we’ve decided to spend a whole season exploring it!

Meet Our Guest(s):

Pamela Snow

Pamela Snow

Pamela Snow, Ph.D., is a professor of cognitive psychology in the School of Education at La Trobe University in Australia and co-director of the Science of Language and Reading (SOLAR) Lab. She is both a speech-language pathologist and a registered psychologist, and her research focuses on ensuring language and literacy success across the school years.

Reid Smith

Reid Smith is an elementary school teacher and curriculum leader at a school in Australia, and is also a doctoral candidate at La Trobe University’s Science of Language and Reading (SOLAR) Lab. His research focuses on the contribution of background knowledge to the act of reading. He is also co-CEO of Ochre Education, a not-for-profit organization committed to closing educational gaps by providing teachers with free, high-quality curriculum materials.

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.

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

“This idea of having a coherent curriculum that systematically builds knowledge and skills over time is something that we think is really important for our kids.”

—Reid Smith

“I'd just point to making sure that you really give students the opportunity to learn more about the world that they're in and the cultures that we have in the past, present, and future. They're all really important things for our kids. And, you know, from an instrumentalist point of view, because it helps their reading comprehension.”

—Pamela Snow

"I think we respect teacher autonomy when we give them the knowledge that they need about how the English writing system works, right across the Reading Rope, and how the English language works, right across the Reading Rope.”

—Pamela Snow

Season 6, Episode 3

Consciously foster math fluency

Tune in to the latest episode of Math Teacher Lounge where we learn how to intentionally foster fluency with Art Baroody, Ph.D. Listen as Baroody shares strategies on how to utilize a student’s natural problem-solving skills and desire to learn to build fluency.

Portrait of a smiling elderly man with a mustache, wearing a red shirt, framed by a circle with a patterned background of triangles and math problem-solving skills.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A man with gray hair and a mustache smiles at the camera, wearing a red collared shirt, shown inside a circular frame with simple graphic accents—perfect for hosting a math podcast focused on building math fluency.

Art Baroody, Ph.D.

Art Baroody is currently a Professor Emeritus of Curriculum & Instruction at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He received his Ph.D. in educational and developmental psychology from Cornell University in 1979. His research focuses on early childhood mathematics education—specifically, the development of number counting and arithmetic concepts and skills from two to eight years of age. He is the co-author of the widely used Test of Early Mathematics Ability (3rd edition; published 2003 by Pro-Ed). He is a co-author of the 2013 What Works Clearinghouse Teaching math to young children: A practice guide published by the U.S. Department of Education. A focus of his research, which was supported by two Department of Education grants, is how to foster fluency with the basic arithmetic combinations. Art is currently the Principal Investigator for two National Science Foundation grants to develop an electronic test of early numeracy.

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 you teach fluency appropriately, if you foster meaningful memorization, then you get the kind of things you want to see too–which is an intellectual curiosity and excitement about math.”

—Dr. Art Baroody

Stay connected!

Season 8, Episode 3

Knowledge and vocabulary: Two sides of the same coin, with Gina Cervetti

In this episode, Susan Lambert talks to Gina Cervetti, Ph.D., about literacy development, knowledge building, vocabulary expansion—and the deep connections among all three. Gina explains why she sees knowledge and vocabulary as two sides of the same coin. She also attempts to expand the listener’s understanding of what knowledge really is, it’s not just subject-area knowledge; It’s also cultural knowledge. In this process, she introduces the idea of conceptual coherence and the benefits of this approach to knowledge building, as well as avenues for implementing it in the classroom. Lastly, Gina offers strategies for how teachers can effectively build students’ vocabulary without relying on a vocabulary list, the usefulness of which has not been shown by the research.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Gina Cervetti

Gina Cervetti

Gina Cervetti is a professor of education in the Marsal Family School of Education at University of Michigan. She studies and teaches classes related to elementary reading and language instruction and curriculum development. Gina earned her doctorate in educational psychology at the Michigan State University and spent several years at University of California, Berkeley, as a designer and researcher on projects related to the integration of literacy and science instruction. That work inspired an interest in the significance of knowledge-enriching and participatory contexts, like that of science, in literacy development. She has written about this work in a number of journal articles and a book with Jacqueline Barber, titled, No More Science Kits or Texts in Isolation: Teaching Science and Literacy Together.

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.

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

“Above all other things in education, literacy is a gateway to so many of the things that are essential for human flourishing and human choice.”

—Gina Cervetti, Ph.D.

“Knowledge is so complex that it actually offers a number of different benefits. And different kinds of knowledge actually benefit literacy development in different ways.”

—Gina Cervetti, Ph.D.

“It makes sense to capitalize on the knowledge that students bring, both as a platform for their literacy learning, [and] also to further develop it so that they're also understanding the context of their lives and their communities and their families.”

—Gina Cervetti, Ph.D.

Season 8, Episode 12

Language and literacy, with Catherine Snow

Harvard School of Education professor of cognition and education Catherine E. Snow, Ph.D., joins Susan Lambert on this episode to reflect on the state of language and literacy instruction in the U.S. They begin their conversation discussing early literacy and linguistics, then dive into Snow’s work on the National Research Council report “Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children.” Lambert and Snow talk about building vocabulary, growing student curiosity in reading, and exposing students to academic language. Snow talks about the specific tools educators need for meaningful help in the classroom, shares her hopes (and fears) for the future of reading instruction in the U.S., and explains why she encourages teachers to let their classrooms be noisier.

Meet Our Guest(s):

image of Catherine Snow, Science of Reading: The Podcast guest in the episode Language and Literacy

Catherine E. Snow, Ph.D.

Catherine E. Snow received her doctorate in developmental psychology from McGill University, where she wrote her thesis on how adult speech supports early language development. She subsequently worked for several years in the linguistics department of the University of Amsterdam before moving to Harvard, where her interests expanded to include language and literacy development. She chaired the National Academy of Sciences Committee that produced the report “Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children” (1998) and the RAND Reading Study Group that produced Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program for Reading Comprehension (2000), a volume that influenced the federal education funding agenda for the next 20 years. Her work has been characterized by a willingness to defend unpopular positions about language learning and teaching, early childhood education, and literacy instruction. Much of her recent work has been carried out in collaboration with educational practitioners and other researchers focused on understanding the most urgent problems of practice in literacy education, under the auspices of the Strategic Education Research Partnership (SERP) Institute and Boston Public Schools.

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

“Part of preventing reading difficulties means focusing on programs to ensure that all children have access to books from birth and that they have access to adults who will read those books with them and discuss them.”

—Catherine E. Snow, Ph.D.

“I see academic language and exposure to academic language as an expansion of children's language skills that both contributes to successful literacy—successful reading comprehension—and gets built through encounters with texts, but also encounters with oral activities.”

—Catherine E. Snow, Ph.D.

“Let your classroom be noisier. Let the kids be more engaged and more socially engaged, because that is actually a contribution to their language development and to their motivation to keep working.”

—Catherine E. Snow, Ph.D.

Spring ’24 Rewind, Episode 14

Spring ’24 Rewind: Biliteracy and assessment, with Lillian Durán, Ph.D.

Susan Lambert joins biliteracy expert and professor Lillian Durán, who holds a doctorate in educational psychology from the University of Minnesota and researches the improvement of instructional and assessment practices with preschool-aged multilingual/English learners.

Durán begins by pointing out the difference between being bilingual and biliterate, then describes the key advantages of being bilingual and the unique skills students who speak multiple languages bring to school. She then discusses how the Simple View of Reading connects to Spanish, the double standard that often occurs when bilingual students are celebrated vs. when they are not, and the process of screening and assessment for multilingual/English learner students. Lastly, Durán compels educators to avoid viewing biliteracy and dual language support as a sub-population of their classroom and instead prioritize the development of students’ home languages, whatever they may be, alongside English instruction.

Meet Our Guest(s):

Lillian Durán, Ph.D.

Lillian Durán, Ph.D.

Lillian Durán has a doctorate in educational psychology from the University of Minnesota and is a professor in the Department of Special Education and Clinical Services at the University of Oregon. She holds a bachelor’s in elementary education from Antioch College and a master’s in education and human development from George Washington University. Her research focuses on large-scale equitable language and literacy measurement development in English and Spanish from preschool to 6th grade. She also is project director on several training grants from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs, which prepare master’s and doctoral students to serve marginalized populations with disabilities with a focus on equity and improving educational outcomes. Durán frequently delivers presentations on the topic of recommended practices in language, and on literacy practices with multilingual/English learners. She has served on multiple equity and diversity councils, including the National Association for Young Children and the Division for Early Childhood. Prior to her work in higher education,Durán spent nine years as an elementary special education teacher both in Prince George’s County, Maryland, and in rural southwestern Minnesota.

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

“Language is inextricably linked to culture. We want to make sure these families and children feel valued and honored within our schools.”

—Lillian Durán, Ph.D.

“No matter what language you start to learn some of those skills in, there's a transfer and understanding of how to listen to sounds and how to put sounds together.”

—Lillian Durán, Ph.D.

Season 9, Special Episode

A guide to integrating knowledge building into your classroom, with Jackie Relyea, Ph.D.

In this special episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Jackie Relyea, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Literacy Education at North Carolina State University, who’ll give you a comprehensive guide to integrating background knowledge into your teaching as you create a content-rich classroom. Jackie offers insights into why time-tested classroom staples such as read-alouds and word walls are effective tools for building background knowledge … and how to make them even better. She also digs into why vocabulary is just one facet of conceptual knowledge and what the research says about background knowledge for multilingual learners.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with long dark hair, wearing a dark blazer and white top, smiles at the camera. There is a blue open book graphic in the lower right corner of the circular frame.

Jackie Relyea, Ph.D.

Jackie Eunjung Relyea, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Literacy Education in the College of Education at North Carolina State University. Her research centers on understanding the uniqueness of and variations in reading development, as well as developing and evaluating the efficacy of literacy instructional practices aimed at improving learning opportunities for multilingual students. Her work has been supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, the American Educational Research Association-National Science Foundation, and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. She currently serves as an Editorial Fellow for the Journal of Educational Psychology. She earned her Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Meet our host, Susan Lambert

Susan Lambert is Chief Academic Officer, 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.

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

“Literacy for my students meant more than just reading and writing; it was about access, access to the world, and access to knowledge and opportunities, and even independence—finding their voices.”

–Jackie Eunjung Relyea, Ph.D.

“You can think of a schema like … mental maps or the frameworks that help us store and organize new information and knowledge. The richer and the more detailed your schema about a particular topic, the easier it is to understand and remember new information about it.”

–Jackie Eunjung Relyea, Ph.D.

“Vocabulary oftentimes is the tip of the iceberg of the whole: the conceptual knowledge. It's not a simple definition of the single word; it's really conceptual knowledge and understanding that is represented by the word.”

–Jackie Eunjung Relyea, Ph.D.

Season 9, Special Episode

A better way to teach our teachers, with Karen Betz, Ed.D.

In this special episode of Science of Reading: The Podcast, Susan Lambert is joined by Assistant Professor of Literacy and Coordinator of Reading Science Programs at Marian University Karen Betz, Ed.D., to discuss a key topic in the Science of Reading movement: higher education. Betz describes how we can better prepare new teachers to provide evidence-based instruction, and her tool to help teachers in higher education assess whether their courses align to reading research. Betz also offers advice for current practitioners on how they can support change at the university level.

Meet Our Guest(s):

A woman with shoulder-length brown hair and glasses, wearing a dark blazer, smiles in front of a light background. Illustrated icons of a light bulb and lines are overlaid, evoking the spirit of the science of reading podcast.

Karen Betz, Ed.D.

Karen Betz, Ed.D., is an assistant professor of literacy and coordinator of reading science programs for Klipsch Educators College at Marian University in Indianapolis, Indiana. Betz launched the school’s Master of Science in reading science, which was the first of its kind developed in Indiana. She founded KB Literacy Consulting, which supports public, charter, and private schools in developing systems to ensure all children receive effective reading and writing instruction, and serves as developer and trainer of the Higher Education Community of Practice course for The Literacy Architects, an organization that supports instructors in aligning coursework to reading research. Betz’s research focuses on her passion for providing and helping others develop effective teacher preparation for pre-service and in-service teachers in the Science of Reading. A graduate of the University of Cincinnati with a Bachelor of Arts in psychology, Bachelor of Science in elementary education, Master of Science in elementary education, and an endorsement in gifted education, Betz also holds a doctorate in reading science from Mount St. Joseph University.

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.

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

“The reality is, many of our pre-service teachers are entering the classroom not prepared and they don't know that they're not prepared.”

— Karen Betz

“It has taken legislation and I don't think that's a bad thing. We need to have some people invested in understanding what the issue is. We've got to stop the bleeding in higher education in order to really make gains.”

— Karen Betz

“We're not working against each other. We're not in competition. We're all trying to ensure that all pre-service teachers, when they leave the university or the program, that they're prepared. And it ultimately always is going to come down to the children, and we can never lose sight of that. It's about the kids.”

— Karen Betz

“Don't be afraid to say ‘I don't know.’ I think people respect that, that you say, ‘I just don't know’ and ‘how can you help me learn more?’”

— Karen Betz