Literacy Talks

Things We’ve Heard (That We Wish Weren’t True)

• Reading Horizons • Season 8 • Episode 16

Share episode

Ever hear something in a meeting, online, or even at a conference that made you do a double take? In this episode, the hosts of Literacy Talks share surprising, questionable, and even cringe-worthy things they’ve heard about literacy—and why they wish they weren’t true. From conversations that raise eyebrows to persistent myths that refuse to fade, it’s all on the table. Tune in for thoughtful reactions, a little laughter, and a lot of clarity.

💬 Want more insights like this?
Subscribe to the Literacy Talks Podcast Digest for episode recaps, resources, and teaching takeaways delivered straight to your inbox!

Do you teach Structured Literacy in a K–3 setting?
Sign up for a free license of Reading Horizons Discovery® LIVE and start teaching right away—no setup, no hassle. Sign-up Now.

Coming Soon: Reading Horizons Ascend™
From Pre-K readiness to advanced fluency, Ascend™ offers a consistent, needs-based reading experience across every grade, tier, and model—so every student can build mastery, one skill at a time. Learn More.

Narrator:

Welcome to Literacy Talks, the podcast for literacy leaders and champions everywhere, brought to you by Reading Horizons. Literacy Talks is the place to discover new ideas, trends, insights and practical strategies for helping all learners reach reading proficiency. Our hosts are Stacy Hurst, a professor at Southern Utah University and Chief Academic Advisor for Reading Horizons. Donell Pons, a recognized expert and advocate in literacy, dyslexia and special education, and Lindsay Kemeny, an elementary classroom teacher, author and speaker. Now let's talk literacy.

Stacy Hurst:

Welcome to this episode of literacy talks. I'm Stacy Hurst, and I'm joined by Donell Pons and Lindsay Kemeny, where each week, we discuss all things or something literacy related, and we take turns choosing the topic. For those of you who've listened, you know this this week, it is Lindsay's topic. So Lindsay, what are we talking about today? Yeah, so I

Lindsay Kemeny:

thought it would be fun today to share some things that we have heard, either in the science of reading community or just in the more broad kind of education or literacy community that we disagree with, I think it would be kind of fun. Maybe you've heard something and you're like, I don't think so. And so we'll just kind of go around and share and get reactions and see if you know we all agree, or if we disagree with each other, or what. And I actually, you know, I, as I was making my list, as I was thinking about it, I have, I don't know, I have about 10 things. I'm like, Wow, I'm pretty disagreeable, I guess. But, you know, I don't think we'll have time for them all. So we'll just kind of go around one at a time and see what we have time for and see what comes up. I always think it's kind of fun, because I never know what everyone's going to say, and kind of, you know, makes our episode a little exciting. So I will go ahead and start. I'll kick things off, and then Stacy will go to you, and then Donell, okay, all right, so this is something that I have that I saw online. I've seen it from a few different people, and they said that they wished people weren't referring to the simple view of reading as much, because it is outdated and it is really old, and that, like at least one of these educators had said, you know, I wish people would use the active view because it's newer and more recent. So this is something I disagree with, because it's actually a good thing that it is the simple view of reading is old because it has, you know, there has been a lot of research to support it, and there isn't any recent research that you know contradicts it. So I think that is good. So it's, it's really, in my opinion, it's not possible for the simple view of reading to be outdated because we just have more and more studies that confirm the accuracy of it. Now that doesn't mean it, it shows, it shows everything to do with reading, right? We know it's a simple view of something that is more complex, but what are your reactions to that and that, that comment,

Stacy Hurst:

well, I think you could probably tell, for those of you are watching the video, both mine and donell's faces were like, what I mean, that's foundational, right? And we've talked about the nature of research is once something has a significant effect or finding, then it's the job of researchers to disprove it, and that theory has not been able to be disproven. So to me, that is a more foundational tenant, like we need to be looking at it and and referring to it and Donell, I know you've talked a lot about Steve Dykstra dykstras Bullseye that that would fall in the bull's eye, that would fall right in the direct middle. Why would we discount it? Because it's old, right?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, exactly. And that seemed to be the reasoning, like it's outdated. And I just thought, Wait, excuse me, like, how you know has anything disproven it? No. So that's a good thing, that it's so old, and we still have research that shows it's correct, right? And I don't think I'm being very eloquent in how I say that.

Donell Pons:

Donell, what I like about it's very approachable, too. So the other thing, it's anything but simple. And we've all talked about that before, and that's even said by the individuals who came up with the simple view of reading. It's anything but simple. So however, having something that visually folks can approach and say, Okay, I think I that's making sense to me, and then follow that original understanding, as basic as it is, as they gain more knowledge, which the simple view expands and contracts for folks that way, which is really interesting. And that's not always. That's not always something folks have, like a touchstone within the research, or something they're studying. That is, like the simple view that can be that for folks to make sure. Now, wait a minute, is my understanding of this in alignment? You can go back quickly look at see how it aligns. Yes, yes, that makes sense. I'm solid. I think it's invaluable.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, yeah. It's just it's been validated over and over. And so that is something that is, you know, a weakness with maybe newer models, you know, that makes them not as strong as a simpler view, because it's been validated over and over. So the newer ones could be based in research. But has there been research specifically on that model that kind of shows, yes, this is a very valid and reliable model. Like, if you took one of those pieces out, students wouldn't be able to read, you know what I mean, like. So I just think there's more that goes into it than just like, oh, this is new and exciting, or this is old and so it's outdated, right? All right. So, Stacy, what's your what's your first disagree?

Stacy Hurst:

So I like your first one out of the gate, by the way. That's great, because I think there are some that are so tired that they might not even be worth talking about. Like, the science of reading is only about phonics. I think we all disagree with that. I think that's like, right, common sense at this point, but I do. I've been thinking a lot lately about NAEP data, and been asked questions about it. And I think one thing I disagree with, people are talking about the most recent scores, which are 2024 that it's because of covid that we're seeing the declines. But in reality, the decline started before covid. Yes, we haven't recovered from covid, but I don't think that is the reason for the most recent scores, solely that we're on a downward decline, and why that matters with how we look about look at the data, right then what? It's not just we didn't play catch up, we just started teaching where we were. And I think that that's telling too, but this goes back a long time. And one thing that Donell, I know you have looked into this too, but that we haven't seen gains in the score since 2011 like nationally, some states have individually, but Mary Ann wolf has been in my mind a lot lately too, and she's talking a lot about screen time and technology and 2011 if you think back to that time, maybe that was an impact of that too. But I think if we are too quick to dismiss the most recent nape scores just as a covid issue, then we miss really introspect, introspecting on why they are. I don't know. Donell, I think you have thoughts. What are you thinking?

Donell Pons:

Yeah, no, I this is always an interesting conversation, because we are it's, it seems like we're compelled to come up with a quick answer. We want to say, Oh, it's this or that. And quite frankly, we know it's a lot more complicated than that. Typically and oftentimes, I think to myself, what's it really going to take to move a large needle? What does it really take to see gains, not just in one pocket, one area somewhere? And if you look at the states that have seen true gains, that lift is tremendous. If you really give it a stew and you can pull it apart and say, Oh, I'm familiar with this piece, or I saw this, and I heard them talking about such and such, but it was everything. It was a big lift. I don't know. Lindsay, what are you thinking?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Well, yeah, I feel like there's so many factors into, you know that that go into it, and I agree Stacy, like, we already didn't have these great scores before covid. And a lot of times I'm just ready to, like, move beyond the whole covid conversation. But part of that is just being, like, traumatized through that whole experience of trying to teach online and everything. But you know, something that I have heard recently is that, Oh, see, we're doing the science of reading, and the name scores aren't better, and that, I that's another like, I disagree with, and I'm really surprised to hear that, because I think, Well, I do not think the majority of schools are following the science of reading or even really understand it, I still feel like the most popular methods for teaching reading are not aligned with research and are, you know, based in three cueing strategies and all the things. So I don't think it's an accurate you know. Statement to say that, and I'm hoping that we're going to get more and more that really understand the science of reading and the science of teaching. But yeah, it's, it's a good question. Donell, how do you actually move the needle like, you know, I know how to do it in my classroom. How do we do it as a system?

Stacy Hurst:

And you think about, I've been thinking about this too, Emily hanford's reporting, which I I count as kind of the beginning of this science of reading movement. We know the science of reading has always been there, but that was like, what, 2018 17, like, it wasn't long before covid. So even by that standard, if you keep in mind that covid Did disrupt many things, then we didn't even have time to implement the focus in a really credible way, like you said. Lindsay, those things take time systemically. And Lindsay, I know you've talked about that whole you just mentioned it being traumatized by that whole covid time, but think about the year that right following that, that you were back in your classroom. What grade were you teaching that year? Were you in second?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Did you I was kindergarten, when everything shut down, and then, okay, I think the next year I was second

Stacy Hurst:

grade, okay, and you had taught you had exposure to second grade before, right? Yeah, earlier. So that first year back after covid, did you notice your students had massive learning gaps?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yes, and they had missed their first grade year and second grade, you know, I'm teaching them second grade we were doing, like every other day, you know, students would come so they're small groups. Yeah, it just, it was hard attendance.

Stacy Hurst:

Like, you're right. It's multifaceted. But I think that as a nation, covid is the thing we need to address it. But keep in mind, the longer trajectory has been downward, so really, yeah, and and that change takes time.

Lindsay Kemeny:

All right, all right. Donell, what's your disagreement?

Donell Pons:

See, so I've got one that's been kicking around a while, and I thought maybe we were past this, but I'm going to bring it up, because it still keeps coming back around, and I get it from a lot of different places. Folks asking it can be parents of students who ask. It can be teachers who ask, and usually it's it's private, like they'll send me an email because it's not something they want to ask out loud. But it's still there. Folks are still very confused about what's the difference between an IEP and a 504, and I have to tell you, in this day and age, you have got to be kidding me, that we are not communicating and conveying this more clearly, that it is a question people have, and they're not being funny, they're not trying to be difficult. They really don't know, which tells me, Wow, the messaging and education around what's the difference between an IEP and a 504, what they provide because they are vastly different, and they provide very different things for a student. And yet, people are very confused about what they are. Why is this still an issue? I don't know what what do you guys think?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Donell, when you say, people, do you? Are you? Are you thinking teachers, educators? Are you thinking just people like general public, like parents and caregivers?

Donell Pons:

Well, so here's the deal. I'm talking both and these are parents who've been involved in meetings where they're called in and they still don't know they're asking legitimately, I was called into an IEP meeting. I'm still not sure what that is. I really we're our communication is still at this point where that was not clear anyway, what would it take? We're talking about changing reading and our understanding of reading and all this, this evidence that we have, training that teachers have received, and we still are pushing against numbers and statistics? Well, I think squarely right up there is if we still don't have a foundational understanding of IEPs and five oh fours, that's a big part of our problem still,

Stacy Hurst:

which I think probably lends itself to maybe something I would disagree with as a general educator, that those things aren't your concern, right? I disagree with that, and parents and everybody needs to be aware of that. So I do see the issue there. It is systemic. Because I know we're prone to just focus on what's right in front of us, but we all need to know the difference.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, and it makes me think, like, because if you go into special education, for sure that is covered. And I wonder in general education and pre service teachers do, is that covered very well about an IEP versus 504, you know,

Donell Pons:

and how much communication is happening in a school amongst the various groups? Because there should be plenty of communication, because the students. All of our students, and so clearly we're not communicating well enough. If we think that, as you say, Stacy, that occurs maybe in another part of the school, I don't even need to be involved with it. No, that's not true. Every student is all our students, so we need to know we should be clear, and that's really interesting to me. The other thing is, they provide very vastly different things, and if people are unclear about what they're providing, then, how well are we providing? It is another question, right?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, and just and, like teacher knowledge being there so that they can provide ideas, or they notice when you have a student that may benefit from a 504, right? Or that you're or you're like, Oh, I think we need to add some things onto their IEP or whatever. I think I know, for my own son, it was so helpful when the teachers really understood and could give us some ideas or some things, or like, oh, we need to change that. Or even me as a teacher, when I've seen an IEP and I've been like, oh my gosh, they like this accommodation so not to like, so an IEP will have accommodations on it, right? I'll be like, Oh, this accommodation is not really needed for this student, but I think this one is and just feeling, you know, confident, to be able to really, like, have your voice heard and input ideas there,

Stacy Hurst:

and to know the difference between actually knowing what an accommodation is, right? Yeah, as a teacher, you're responsible for

Lindsay Kemeny:

and how that's different than intervention. That's like, you know? And with my son, I'm always like, yeah, he needs accommodations. He also needs interventions. So I hope interventions are being provided as well, right?

Stacy Hurst:

And I think that goes I was recently aware of it IEP meeting, where the goal was around oral reading fluency, words correct per minute. But my thinking was, Oh, I feel like, you know, a knowledgeable teacher would look at that particular student and say, his issue isn't right, it's accuracy. So let's set a goal that is, you know, really measurable in that area, and as a teacher, knowing how to how to address that, knowing the difference between yeah and that, having everybody in that team aware of that too, okay? And so

Donell Pons:

lest somebody thinks, Okay, you're going to have this conversation again, I just want you to think about this, the new definition by the International Dyslexia Association of dyslexia. So if you haven't seen it, please go to the website, familiarize yourself with the new definition. But it does bring up the point that there will be students, because we talk a little bit, we get into discussing nuance of dyslexia a bit, and the definition kind of leads us into thinking about this a bit. It also talks about various areas that hadn't been mentioned before in a definition that could be impacting reading. So it gets us thinking in those ways. I just want us to be having really good, clear conversations about the fact that there will be students who will need these additional resources, five oh, fours and IEPs in order to be successful, if we don't understand where students are, what they need, and how prolonged their challenges may be, because again, when we're talking about dyslexia, it can be severe and persistent, then we're never going to meet the needs of those students. So it's just that's how important just That's how important this conversation, I

Narrator:

think, is. For over 40 years, Reading Horizons has helped educators build strong literacy foundations for students. Now with ascend, they're supporting every learner and every tier through one unified solution, ASCEND mastery, a comprehensive pre K through five core literacy program, and ascend focus, an adaptive K through 12 intervention. Learn more and explore how you can bring ascend to your schools at reading horizons.com/ascend implementations begin in the 2026, school year.

Lindsay Kemeny:

All right, so let's go to it's back to me, and I have seen educators telling other educators, as well as parents, not to bother teaching the alphabet song, the normal A, B, C, D, E, F, G, okay, saying not to do it different reasons. They want to do, like, a different version. There's like another song, oh, do the better alphabet song, or whatever. I don't know what is instead, because it has sounds, I think it focuses on the sounds of the letters. Okay, I heard that. Oh, well, they don't need to know the names anyways in order to read. So your time would be better spent teaching them the sounds than the song. I heard like, oh, it teaches them elemento. They think elemento is like a word, you know, and it's not L, M, N, O. Okay, um, so, and and that like, oh, well, I guess I mentioned that just to be mentioned focusing on the sounds instead. Okay, so that's something I disagree with. I think that there is still a lot of value to having students know the alphabet song. There's nothing wrong with learning the names of the letters. Most students can learn the names just fine, as well as the sounds. Parents are familiar with the alphabet song, the students are going to be singing it from the time they're like two or three. There's a lot of products out there that like little toys and things that do the song. I think it's great. As I used to teach kindergarten right now I'm first it's really not that hard. Yes, students come in and they think lmno is something, but you slow them down and you point to each letter as they go, L, M, N, O, so I don't think it's the end of the world. And yes, you can teach another song In addition, if you want, and you can teach a song that has the sounds or whatever. But I think the alphabet song is still very helpful for alphabetical order. You want them to be able to go A to Z really quickly. So there's a lot of reasons that I think it's perfectly fine to teach the alphabet song. Okay, any thoughts on that?

Stacy Hurst:

I agree. And there has been some conversation about what order to introduce the alphabet in generally, right? And I what is the harm in starting with that? Because it gives the students an anchor. I agree with everything you said Lindsay, and as you were talking about having them point to the letters and recognize L, M, N, O is separate. They're separate letters. That's print concepts. Why wouldn't we do that? Right? The other thing is, there is a substantial amount of research that says knowing the letter names, it has a direct correlation with reading proficiency in the future. So we can't dismiss that. And I know you can teach the letter names out of order. But I feel like that's a really efficient way to do it. And then, like, your point about alphabetic order, you're going to need to know that, even in today's world, you need to know alphabetic order, alphabetical order, and apparently you need to know how to say it.

Donell Pons:

You know, it's interesting, because my adult students, I will ask them, how difficult is it for you to have someone tell you the spelling of a name and you write it in the correct order, and they say, I can't do it. That's one thing. Is I can't do so letter name is very important. I ask that one thing because it will happen to you at some point in your life. Here's an address. Oh, I don't know how to spell that address. Could you give it to me while you spell it L, I, and they begin to give you letter names. They don't give you letter sounds. And all of my students have said that what's dropped off early. We never talked about it again, alphabetical order. We didn't talk about letter names again. I've been struggling with this whole alphabet soup of what it is I'm supposed to be doing with it, and that hasn't been a piece of it. And when I bring that up, they all go, thank you for talking about it. It's so embarrassing. And so we practice we go back to A, B, C, D, E, F, G, we practice it. We get very quick with it. We do it backwards, forwards. We're able to do them in between. We get letter names, and I'll tell you, six months in to intervention, all of the other things that we're doing this takes us just a few minutes. Again, I'm not advocating 20 minutes of this. It's just a few minutes, but six months in, my students are saying, oh my gosh, I'm not terrified anymore when I have to ask how to spell something, then I'll be able to write it down. But that's a skill we get asked to do. And I this very easily. Does it right? Getting alphabetical order very easily covers that for folks, yeah.

Lindsay Kemeny:

And more and more I do see that, oh, they don't need to know the names like, you know, I but you know what, most students, most kindergarteners, in my experience, have no problem learning both. There might be a couple that do and, okay, you can emphasize sounds over names, but don't neglect the names at all. Like Donell, I like that. You said, you know, you have to go back and work on that. And you know what I love, Linda Farrell from readsters, and she shares this great activity where they're singing the ABC song, the normal alphabet song, and she has typed up she has this page with the letters, and it like matches the rhythm of the song. So it would be like a, b, c, d, is all on one line, E, F, G, right? And then it's like, H, I, the next line, J, K, L, you know, I, I don't know if I'm saying that right, but anyways, a certain amount of letters on each line that coordinates with the song. And so then they sing and touch as they're going. And I think that's great. That would be a great little intervention for someone like Donell, like you're saying you have a student that still doesn't know their names just doing that. Okay? Stacy, back to you. Fun.

Stacy Hurst:

Fact, I was a first grade teacher when I realized that the ABC song is Twinkle, twinkle. Little. Star tune. You guys are like, Yeah, we knew that. I didn't, and it was a first grader who pointed that out to me. So you're never too old to learn new things. Anyway, Kate, this happened to me. I don't think this is a popular opinion, at least not in the circles that we run in. I know it's not, but I have to tell you the context. I had to go to the DMV the other day, which is always delightful, I'm sure, and for most people there, there was a line. So in line I am talking. This man starts talking to me. He's in line with me. He asked me, what I do? Tell him that I teach literacy. And he said, Oh, you're How did he word it? Let me think, if I can think of it, you're a prophet of a dying religion. And I said, What? And he said, we're not going to need to know how to read anymore, because we have all of this technology. And, you know, we can outsource tons of this. And he goes on to tell me about his cousin who is dyslexic, and the whole world has been open to him because we have speech to text and AI to help him through the world. And he said, by and this guy, very philosophical, said, he's a very philosophical guy, I can tell, he said. And by the way, most of the world's existence, we haven't been able to read. And so, you know, we do teach that the brain wasn't wired to read. But I said no, but we have been talking since the beginning of time, and literate print is language in a visual form. We talked about that. So I thought that really, like threw me. I was shook, shook in as they say, I was shook, yeah, but I was thinking. Thankfully, that's not the prevalent thinking, as far as I know. But what if it becomes that I we really do need language, those large language models, and print is a form of that. How do how else do we stay immortal too, like print is everlasting, right? So, I don't know, what do you guys think?

Lindsay Kemeny:

Oh, I just think it's silly. Of course. Like, what are you gonna do driving down the road? You have to read the signs. You know? It's like, when people say writing is gonna be obsolete too, and people are, you know, I'm like, No, I still write my grocery list on a paper. You still write a card to someone. You still write, you know, some people write in a journal. I don't, but, you know, and you have kids are drawing pictures and they're writing notes to people. And I mean, I just, I don't think any of that is going away, even with technology, true.

Stacy Hurst:

And heaven forbid you're ever in this situation where you need to know how to write. SOS, i Are you going to communicate that?

Donell Pons:

Okay, this has really got me thinking about Stanislaus dehain and also Mary Ann Wolf, talking about the very real brain differences between a brain where reading, they have reading and reading has occurred, and a brain where there is no reading and there are, there are differences, which is interesting. So it'd be interesting to see. And I've heard Marianne wolf ask this question too on some podcasts recently, and she shudders, of course. But there is something very deeply personal that occurs between you and a page, particularly when you can read and it isn't vocalized outside. But those are, those are those quiet moments that occur between the individual and the page, and we have benefited greatly from those. So it's just really interesting, fascinating. And yet, I do have folks in my family right with dyslexia, and so I'm very aware of the many advances we have made and how that can make life so much easier to navigate when we have these advancements for folks who have, like a reading difficulty, like dyslexia, and those are important, I would never downplay that, too. But I would also be it'd be interesting to ask my my son, who likes to, you know, pontificate a bit about the written word as well as spoken language and ask him what he thinks of that, because he's gained so much from a page, which is interesting.

Stacy Hurst:

Yeah, you'll have to ask him and report back, but yeah, it really had me thinking, and I had to manage my reaction, because, as you can imagine, I was like, No, we're going to continue to need this.

Lindsay Kemeny:

All right. Donell, do you have any other Do you have another disagreement to share?

Donell Pons:

Do I have a disagreement? Because, you know, mine are just mine's just a statement of dissatisfaction.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Know how many you had?

Donell Pons:

Well, I've got one more that I just got to bring up, because I still keep seeing it and it's driving me crazy. Why don't we just vow today to never use these words again in an educational setting? Wait and see. Never use it again. Vow to never do that again. Wait and see. No. No, no, no, no. Gather today what you can see and do something about it. There's no weight. I see it, I do something about it. That's what I want to change that, to do something, see it, do something that one drives me crazy. Never Want to Hear it. So today, from today on, everybody, we're making this commitment. We're never going to say that again in an educational setting, wait and see does not exist.

Lindsay Kemeny:

It's frustrating for me, as a first grade teacher when I see a student that you know that just really struggles, and I'm trying to do all the thing I'm providing interventions. We're making progress, but I feel like they still need more support going forward, especially in other years of schooling, and so I try to get testing done to see if they will qualify for an IEP. And what's frustrating to me is it seems like they usually don't, even though I know. And it's kind of, there is this idea of, let's wait and see. And I feel like, why do we wait till they're two to three years behind? Like, I'm telling you right now, it is taking so much work to for them to learn each new letter, each new spelling, I can see down the line like, and I'm not like saying, oh, you know, I'm not saying there's like no hope for a child or something, but you know, when there's so much work going into it, you just want to get all these supports set up right away, especially as a mother who wished you know we had certain supports right away. And so it's just so frustrating when it seems like, I don't know if it's the system, but sometimes it's like, you can't get them in the testing doesn't show they're far enough behind, even though you as a teacher, know, and even the parent knows, hey, it's taken this many years for them to learn their letters or whatever, you know, like, Ah, so it's so so that resonates with me. Donell, I hate this. Wait and see Lindsay.

Donell Pons:

I almost wish there was a box you could check where it says severe and persistent. Yeah, yes, this is severe and persistent. Like, can we make it? That's, can we make it something we can all understand, because that's what you're just talking about. All that effort that's severe and it's persistent.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Okay, we're back to me, so maybe we have time for one more each. Donell, we can always skip your because, as I said, I have like 10 of them, so I could just do the next one on my list. Okay, okay, so this is something that you guys know, because I I've mentioned this to you when we heard it, and it kind of like it just rubbed me the wrong way when I heard it and it was we were at a conference together. I heard it a couple different times at this conference, and then again, I heard it on a podcast after the conference, and I I found out the idea of this comes from the author, John Maxwell. So I don't want to like, you know, I'm so this is something I guess that comes from John Maxwell, the author, and I disagree with it, all right? And it's this idea of the leadership lid. And so the speakers who were talking about this were talking about, like, what it takes to be a good leader. And they're basically saying there is this, like no one is going to be better than you. This is like, how it came across, like you're a leader and you can't, I mean, I get the sentiment. They're kind of trying to say, as a leader, you want to keep growing so that the people who, I guess, follow you, right, the people you're leading, keep growing as well. But, and so they said, Oh, this is this leadership lid. And they would kind of do this with their hands and like, they're, you know, they're never going to rise above this. They're never going to rise above you. And I'm just like, Ew, that just really rubs me the wrong way, because I think a good leader is helping that person achieve their potential and go higher than than like you as a leader, right? Like you're just and there's all different areas that you can be amazing at. And so just because you are a leader doesn't mean you're great at everything I've always appreciated. For example, when I had a principal who, who knows who to rely on for certain things, right? The principal knows they don't have to be. I mean, of course, we want our leaders to keep learning and growing the but a good leader knows who to go to, who are the experts. And then you could, you know, you could, I could be considered a leader, because I'm like a teacher leader, and I'm, you know, I've written books, and all of us, you know, we have this podcast. I don't think I'm the best at everything, and my whole goal, like with writing books and doing this podcast, is to help others be the very best they can. And that's gonna be better than me. You know what? I mean, it's like. So I just I hate the whole idea a great leader doesn't limit the potential of others. But helps them rise as high as possible. So that's my beef with the leadership lid. Any any thoughts on that?

Stacy Hurst:

Just fond memories from when we first heard it because you were reacted to that immediately. No, like, what is that? You know?

Donell Pons:

And it makes me think of that a rising tide lifts all boats. Really good leadership lifts everybody. You see people that you never thought would be getting doing something or going out for this, and that's good leadership. That's a sign to me of really good leadership in a building is when you see teachers that are reaching for things they hadn't reached for before. We're thinking of ourselves as accomplishing this or that goal. And it's not all coming directly from the one leader in the building, or say, if it's the principle in that building, but it spreads. And that's good leadership. Is when you see everybody being elevated from that like you said, you never you don't know what the where some of the stars are going to be. You know, maybe you haven't seen them yet, but under good leadership, they could be there.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, okay, Stacy, do you have a last disagreement to share?

Stacy Hurst:

I do, but I'm kind of in the same boat as Donell. Like I don't, I'm still actually processing this disagreement. I think I'm landing on a certain Yeah, but I have heard it, and I think I've even said, you don't have to like reading to teach reading. And I think I'm disagreeing with that. I feel like that's a critical piece. And the more that I mean, I look at all the competencies that I'm addressing as a professor and my students sitting in front of me, many of them say, Oh, I don't like to read. I haven't read a book in years or and that's what, like, prompts me to say. I should set a standard or a competency the state doesn't. But like, I should set my own of getting my students to like reading again, again, or at all, right? Because I think that matters when you're teaching reading. I'm not 100% on that, but I think over the years, I think we've had this conversation before. Do you need to like reading to teach it? I know the critical thing is that our students need to be able to read, right? But I think I'm moving more to the Yes, you do need to like it.

Donell Pons:

Donell and Stacy, you have evidence. So I just got this from the library because I'd heard about it, and I want to just read it raising kids who read by Daniel Willingham. And I'd say there's a lot of evidence inside that book to say yes you do, or if you don't love it. Fake it, because kids need to think you love it.

Stacy Hurst:

Yeah, I agree. Who? Just when I thought I had bought all the books, right? I need to get that one.

Donell Pons:

And here's a statement in the book that I think will tell us why it's so valuable. He's got a 20th century writer, Richard Wright, that he quotes in here. And Wright describes learning to read, and he describes hearing somebody reading, and he was bewitched, is what he calls it, see. And Willingham says, there's so much value to being bewitched by something. And here's his quote, my sense of life deepened, and the and the feel of things was different. Somehow, the sensations the story aroused in me were never to leave me.

Stacy Hurst:

That makes sense, and you know, I don't want to leave the impression that that most of my students don't like reading many of them do. In fact, I was having a conversation with a student in my office just last week, and she was saying, I wish I could read the Harry Potter books again for the first time. And what you just read to read to us, Donell, that's the experience we're talking about. And some of my students haven't had that.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Yeah, I don't know. I'm gonna play devil's advocate here. I don't, I don't think you have to love reading yourself in order to teach it well, I do think you should fake it, though, like Donell said, so if you don't like reading, I do think you just need to fake it and pretend like you do. You know, because I'm it also just makes me think about the other subjects. Well, I don't love math, but when I teach math, I still need to be able to teach it well. Even though, like, I don't, I'm not like, Oh, I love doing math, or same with, you know, science or whatever else. I don't think I need to love it in order to do it well. But even though I say that, even though I do like enjoy reading, I don't have as much time as I used to, but, but I and I love just talking about those books and kind of sharing, you know, getting students excited as I read aloud to them, and all the things. But, yeah, I don't know it's. Interesting to think about.

Stacy Hurst:

I am. It's an interesting topic, but I would, I would also argue Lindsay to your devil's advocate. I agree that at least faking it would be beneficial. But when you're talking about other subjects which I can wholeheartedly relate to I I'm not as fond of math as some people are, for example, but reading, I feel like is. Math may not be the best example, but maybe something like science or social studies, reading is essential to learning, and so you'd be limited if you couldn't and so that might limit your love of learning those things. I'm also thinking about how I would word this new made up standard about loving reading, and I like what you said about faking it, so I think this standard could be something like you will develop as a teacher, develop the love of reading or the ability to fake it.

Lindsay Kemeny:

How do you make measure that? And I definitely think it's more help but see, maybe they're just combined. I would say I want teachers to love teaching reading. I definitely want you to love teaching reading, and that can be hard because, like some teachers might think, like phonics is really boring. I think this is what happened. This is partly why we had, you know, whole language and everything. Is that, oh, teaching that phonics was just so boring they wanted to get right to the love of reading. So, you know, I don't know. I'm thinking like, oh my gosh, I love my phonics lessons. Wonder if I didn't, well, it's the same thing. I'd have to fake it, because my students get excited about phonics, because I'm excited and like, oh my gosh, this is so amazing. Did you know that you know English words don't end up be Wow, and we have fun and we do our routines and all the things. But, yeah, I don't know. Just thinking aloud here,

Donell Pons:

yeah, it made me think also about with reading Daniel willing hands book again, because I there were many moments in there where I'm thinking, oh, yeah, that just describes that so well. But there are many times along the reading journey in which you're going to need encouragement, because we run into parts where it becomes more difficult, right? We get a more challenging material place before us. We're being asked to do more things now with that material. Maybe now we're being asked to take that material, make connections and also write. And so this is a thing that evolves over time and grows. It has many different aspects to it. And so it does require, I think, all the way along the way, somebody saying, oh, yeah, this is great. We're gonna do we're gonna this is gonna be really good. We're gonna be able to do this thing. It takes a lot of encouragement. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Stacy Hurst:

And Lindsay, you've made me ask another question that we can save for another time. But, yeah, do you need to like teaching reading? And maybe we teach reading, we like teaching reading for different reasons. Maybe, I don't know that might be a topic for another time. Yeah.

Lindsay Kemeny:

Well. And then there's also, I mean, it's like, you know, you have your preferences, like, even, you know, the program you use, maybe one week, you're like, Oh, we're doing this story, I hate the story. And then, like, another week, you're like, oh my gosh, I love, I love this one. This is, like, the best I love when we're doing frog and toad or whatever it is. So, you know, and so we're probably already a little bit practiced of faking it when we need but maybe we need to try a little harder. For me, you know, we have this new program. There's all these knowledge topics. And so there were some topics I remember last year was our first year. There were some topics that I was just like this. I am not excited about and but I'm trying to be all kind of, you know, positive about it. And then when I looked out and I saw just certain students were just on the edge of their seats about it, and I was like, Oh my gosh. And, you know, and I remember one last year was like, my mom's a history teacher, and she loves that we're learning, like, XYZ. And I was like, Oh my gosh. And it was like, that got me even more excited. So it was a good little lesson for me, because you never know what topics or things are going to really excite your students, and you want to, you know, you want to help kind of Ignite that and extend it if you can. So it was a good lesson for me to be more positive, even if I don't like a certain topic or I'm not interested, it doesn't mean the other my students aren't right. Okay? Well, I think we're out of time. So, you know, we all know that I have a lot more disagreements, but that's okay. This was a fun conversation. You guys. Thanks for bringing your your thoughts.

Stacy Hurst:

Yeah, thanks for the question. I actually like maneuvered through my week thinking, what do I disagree with? What do I disagree with? And you know, because you have almost a visceral reaction when you hear those things. So and I'm sure I've learned a lot about myself and thinking about it, so too. Those of you who are listening, we'd love to hear what you disagree with, and maybe you disagree with some things we've said, yeah, that's okay, too. But thank you Lindsay for that topic that was fun. And thanks to all of you who are listening to our podcast today, and we hope you join us for our next episode of literacy talks.

Narrator:

Thanks for joining us today. Literacy Talks comes to you from Reading Horizons, where literacy momentum begins. Visit readinghorizons.com/literacytalks to access episodes and resources to support your journey in the science of reading in.