Dr. Sharon Vaughn, award-winning researcher and multi-published author, who has advised on literacy across 30 states and 10 different countries, joins Susan Lambert on this episode. She digs into how we can build reading comprehension rather than teach it, and what it means for comprehension to be a learning outcome rather than a skill. She and Susan touch on how to ask the right comprehension questions, how to ensure coherency in teaching background knowledge, and where it's easy to go wrong—with knowledge building and with the Science of Reading as a whole. Listeners will walk away with a deeper understanding of which skills lead to comprehension and how to avoid strategy overload.
Show notes:
Quotes:
“Comprehension is an outcome, and it's based on being able to read words accurately, know what they mean, have adequate background knowledge, and also being able to make inferences.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
“I've seen things go awry. Good things get interpreted incorrectly. The Science of Reading has that potential … where people could take that and sort of start creating their own meaning about what it means and start downloading that in districts and schools in ways that are counterproductive.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
“If you look at the early studies from the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, they really were the building blocks for phonemic awareness and phonics and the way in which we have identified the foundation skills as being essential. We act like the Science of Reading is something new, and we've been building this for decades.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
Episode timestamps*
02:00: What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide
04:00: Reading Comprehension: What it is and what it isn’t
09:00: How could we mess up background knowledge?
13:00: The relationship between vocabulary and knowledge building
21:00: Word knowledge and world knowledge, especially in the upper grades
24:00: Strategy of asking and answering questions
26:00: Text matters
27:00: Integrating stretch text
31:00: Collaborative strategic reading
39:00: Project PACT
*Timestamps are approximate, rounded to nearest minute
Dr. Sharon Vaughn, award-winning researcher and multi-published author, who has advised on literacy across 30 states and 10 different countries, joins Susan Lambert on this episode. She digs into how we can build reading comprehension rather than teach it, and what it means for comprehension to be a learning outcome rather than a skill. She and Susan touch on how to ask the right comprehension questions, how to ensure coherency in teaching background knowledge, and where it's easy to go wrong—with knowledge building and with the Science of Reading as a whole. Listeners will walk away with a deeper understanding of which skills lead to comprehension and how to avoid strategy overload.
Show notes:
Quotes:
“Comprehension is an outcome, and it's based on being able to read words accurately, know what they mean, have adequate background knowledge, and also being able to make inferences.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
“I've seen things go awry. Good things get interpreted incorrectly. The Science of Reading has that potential … where people could take that and sort of start creating their own meaning about what it means and start downloading that in districts and schools in ways that are counterproductive.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
“If you look at the early studies from the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, they really were the building blocks for phonemic awareness and phonics and the way in which we have identified the foundation skills as being essential. We act like the Science of Reading is something new, and we've been building this for decades.” —Sharon Vaughn, Ph.D.
Episode timestamps*
02:00: What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide
04:00: Reading Comprehension: What it is and what it isn’t
09:00: How could we mess up background knowledge?
13:00: The relationship between vocabulary and knowledge building
21:00: Word knowledge and world knowledge, especially in the upper grades
24:00: Strategy of asking and answering questions
26:00: Text matters
27:00: Integrating stretch text
31:00: Collaborative strategic reading
39:00: Project PACT
*Timestamps are approximate, rounded to nearest minute
I think the strength I have, from being in this business for decades, is that I've seen things go awry. Good things get interpreted incorrectly. I mean, the Science of Reading has that potential.
Susan Lambert:This is Susan Lambert. And welcome to Science of Reading: The Podcast, from Amplify, where the Science of Reading lives. What is reading comprehension? How can background knowledge be built, rather than taught? And how can vocabulary be developed most effectively in the classroom? These are some of the questions that Dr. Sharon Vaughn explores on this fascinating episode of the podcast. Dr. Sharon Vaughn is the Manuel J. Justiz Endowed Chair in Education and executive director of The Meadow Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas, Austin . She was also the lead author of the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide, "Providing Reading Interventions for Students in Grades 4–9." For those who may be unfamiliar, that guide is full of grade information, which we also discuss during this conversation. And so without further ado , I'm thrilled to share this conversation with Dr. Sharon Vaughn. Well, Dr. Sharon Vaughn, thank you for joining us on today's episode.
Sharon Vaughn:You're welcome! Thank you for having me on this episode.
Susan Lambert:Before we hop into the first question, I do wanna highlight the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide. So the IES Practice Guide. I think this is the most recent one that you supported, all about providing reading interventions for students in grades four through nine. This is a really important practice guide. And I bet you've gotten great feedback on it.
Sharon Vaughn:I so like that you said that, because I think it is a really important practice guide too. And so you having said it opens the door for me to say, in the audience, if you have not looked at this practice guide, it's on the IES website. And it is about teaching students with reading difficulties in grades four to nine. And here's the cool thing, not only does it list the high priority practices that have been proven, are scientifically based , if you will, to improve outcomes. It also has really cool examples of how to do it in your classroom, with real lessons. So dig in! And not only learn what they are, but how to do it.
Susan Lambert:Yeah , and nobody will actually have to go out and look for it. We'll link our listeners in the show notes to this practice guide. And I love that you let me talk about it, because I think the practice guides are underutilized. But I found this one particularly helpful. So, thank you for helping to craft that guide. So, let's just talk a little bit about reading comprehension, and what reading comprehension really is. And you have a quote that I absolutely love. I have carried it with me since the first time I heard you say it, and I can't remember where that was. But the quote is, "You can't teach reading comprehension. You can't teach reading comprehension. It's an outcome." Can you tell us about that?
Sharon Vaughn:Oh gosh! Thank you so much for saying that, because I think that, you know, especially around the Science of Reading, many people are sort of obsessed with the idea that the Science of Reading is phonics . And they are like, "Oh my gosh!" That gives them sort of a justifiable cause against the Science of Reading, because it isn't just phonics. Well, of course it's not <laugh>! However, it is quite defensively impossible to learn to read if you cannot read words. So if you wanna get to comprehension, the most important thing you have to get to is accurate and efficient word-reading. And of course the mechanism for getting to accurate and efficient word-reading are things like phonemic awareness and phonics. But, the point is, you have to be able to read these words. And, here's the second thing, you have to know what they mean. So, vocabulary is important. You gotta know how to read 'em. You gotta know what they mean. And those two developments work together. And then with adequate background knowledge, comprehension comes for free for the vast majority of students. So, comprehension is an outcome. And it's based on being able to read words accurately, know what they mean, have adequate background knowledge, and also being able to make inferences and not check yourself when you go to a text. For the most part, if we're paying attention, if we can read words efficiently, and know what they mean, and have background knowledge, it yields comprehension. And comprehension, when you try to teach it independent of word-reading, efficient word-reading, which some people think of as fluency , vocabulary, and background knowledge, you can't get there. So if students can't read words, don't know what they mean, emphasizing comprehension is just really the wrong priority. I think that's what I meant by that, Susan.
Susan Lambert:Well, it stuck with me a really long time. And I think it's because I put myself back in the classroom. And I'm sure other classroom teachers are going to relate to this. Do you know how often what we thought we were doing was teaching comprehension? I'm sure teachers can relate to that right now. We thought we were teaching comprehension. And to hear that, "Yes, there's other factors that can influence it. And if these other factors are in place, reading comprehension comes for free." That's another great quote! I think that's another Dr. Sharon Vaughn great quote <laugh> that we're gonna put out there is that if you do it right, reading comprehension is free <laugh>.
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah! And all of these strategies, like if you don't know how to read words, there are not enough comprehension strategies to get you to comprehension. If you don't know what the words mean, you can teach me 27 comprehension strategies and my comprehension will not improve. All I will do is be confused by all these strategies you've taught me. But if I have efficient word-reading, and know what the words mean, and have background knowledge, then things like main idea, and summarization, and inferencing become very meaningful tasks that help me dig deeper into what I'm reading. And then you don't need a bucket full of comprehension strategies. You need a handful. Just a small handful of comprehension strategy.
Susan Lambert:I love how you said that, because, as you know, right now there's just this big conversation about, well, is it background knowledge and vocabulary that we should be teaching? Or is it comprehension strategies that we should be teaching? And really good readers have both things. They use both things. So it's not an either/or proposition. However, background knowledge is pretty important; and it really does influence comprehension.
Sharon Vaughn:Well, it does Susan. And like all things in education, we have every single good idea that we can mess up <laugh> . And I kind of worry that we might do that with background knowledge. Because is it important? Yes. Does it facilitate comprehension? Yes. Has it been overlooked? Yes. But listen to this, how could we mess it up? The way we could mess it up is to think that you TEACH background knowledge rather than BUILD background knowledge.
Susan Lambert:Oh, tell me what you mean.
Sharon Vaughn:Did you like that idea?
Susan Lambert:I did, yes! It's another Sharon Vaughn excellent quote there .
Sharon Vaughn:<laugh> I'm hanging out with you more often <laugh>! But, what I mean by that is, if we start seeing background knowledge is having, like, these components. And we have to stand in front of students, and start teaching it where the teacher's doing all the work. And the students are sitting there half aware , half asleep, and mostly hoping it ends soon, then we are not going to enhance background knowledge . But if we say to ourselves, "Hmm. I need students to have broader, deeper, more thorough background knowledge, how do I build that?" The way I build that is this duo-focus, from the very early stages of teaching, in which I have listening through higher level texts, because students can comprehend through listening at a higher level, and I'm using information texts that build on what students are going to be learning in the future in social studies, and science, and various areas. So I'm literally building this background knowledge from the beginning through listening comprehension. And of course I'm focusing more on information texts, because those are excellent sources for doing that. And so by building, I mean that you systematically say to yourself, "What are the topics — these students are vulnerable, meaning they have inadequate background knowledge — and our priorities — meaning they're g onna be taught in the near future, in the next year or two — that I can ramp up?" So that the key ideas, concepts, and vocabulary words are familiar to students when they encounter them. Does that kind of fit, with what I'm thinking about with building rather than teaching?
Susan Lambert:It makes a lot of sense. It actually does, yeah. There's an essence of coherency here too that I hear coming through in what you're describing. That, probably, when we build background knowledge, it's not, "Oh, we're going to look at this topic today. And tomorrow we're gonna think about another one. And the next day another one." Right? There must be some kind of time on topic that probably makes a difference. Does that make sense?
Sharon Vaughn:Whoa! So I am going to borrow that word, coherence. I'm going to borrow it, and use it in the future, because it is really one of the fundamental ideas about making building of background knowledge successful. Because, as you said, it's not sort of this hunting and pecking around different ideas, like, " Oh, today we're gonna talk about legs on a spider. Tomorrow we're gonna talk about icebergs." We can go through those things in iterative ways. And we can return to these topics. It doesn't mean you spend all your time on one topic and never leave. But there is a structure, an organization, a coherence, as Susan says, that really allows students to sort of, in a spiral and iterative way, encounter these topics. Enhancing their background knowledge and concept understanding over time. And you know what else Susan, they could be done in ways in which they're sort of thematically organized. So, it could be something like places in the world. And so for a while you build on different places in the world that students need to know about. Or it could be something like things that move fast. And you can go from animals to F1, to all kinds of really interesting things that move fast. And you really learn about them. You learn vocabulary, and concepts. Then you learn things like velocity. And you could just imagine how helpful that could be as students broaden what they read and learn later on.
Susan Lambert:There's motivation in that for students. I'm in the world of elementary, that's where I taught. But I loved seeing students get excited about topics. And get excited to use words that they felt like were big people words. There is a motivation to that for kids in schooling. And since you said it, let's talk a little bit about it. There is this relationship between vocabulary and knowledge in the process of building knowledge. You're building and acquiring more breadth, and depth, and vocabulary as well. And so, the two things are so reciprocal in nature that when you have vocabulary, you likely have the knowledge about where that vocabulary sits, in terms of themes and topics.
Sharon Vaughn:I really think that's right. And I think the emphasis on vocabulary, which we've seen, Susan don't you agree, grew in the last 10 years.
Susan Lambert:Yes.
Sharon Vaughn:And it's pretty well accepted in elementary, upper elementary, even secondary that vocabulary is sort of the , if you will, high nutrition. We need to really build the DNA of learning. And I think that's all right. And like I said, there is no good idea in education that we can't mess up. So let me tell you my worry about vocabulary. You ready for this?
Susan Lambert:Please! Yep, yep I am.
Sharon Vaughn:<laugh> So here's my worry. What I've seen a lot of is that, because vocabulary is a proxy for background knowledge, meaning if we really wanna understand students' background knowledge on a particular topic, a pretty good way to do that is to ask them whether they know the meaning of some of the words that are fundamental to that background knowledge. And so, it becomes this sort of proxy. And we, therefore, think that by teaching vocabulary, we're teaching background knowledge. Because they are associated. And so that's worry number one.
Susan Lambert:I get that. Yes.
Sharon Vaughn:Right? And that's not the same. They're related, but they're not the same. And the second thing, it's like telling me my cousin is related and we're the same. I was like, no, no, no, no, no. I'm not. The second part of vocabulary that worries me is that there's just a lot of words.
Susan Lambert:There are <laugh>.
Sharon Vaughn:Right? There's, like, 5,000 words that students need to learn every year. And so, if we as teachers think, "Oh my gosh, I have to directly teach all of these words. It's my job to be the word teacher," rather than, or in addition to, "It's my job to teach students to be word-conscious." Because if they can accumulate words and become word collectors, then a lot of the learning needed to acquire that multi-thousand number of words they need really comes as they go through life. Listening, and learning, asking questions, reading, and thinking about words. Because we can teach a couple of words a day. We can teach handfuls of words a week. And even if we're on it as a teacher, we will inadequately meet the word learning needs, meaning the needs, of the students we teach. So that's kind of a worry, that we sort of think it's on us to teach them the words and their meaning. 'Cause we just can't do it all. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do some of it, right? Absolutely. But we have to do both.
Susan Lambert:You know, I love that you're framing both of these things so far, vocabulary and background knowledge, in what Sharon Vaughn worries about.
Sharon Vaughn:<Laugh>.
Susan Lambert:How these things can go go awry. How we in education might, what did you say? Ruin them, or destroy them, or something like that? Because it's always good. It's like when we teach vocabulary. What it is and what it's not. It puts some guardrails on it too. It's like, wait a minute, these things are important, but they could also go wrong if we're not careful about how we're viewing these in instruction.
Sharon Vaughn:I like that you said that, because I think the strength I have from being in this business for decades is that I've seen things go awry. Good things get interpreted incorrectly. I mean, the Science of Reading has that potential, don't you think Susan? Where people could take that and sort of start creating their own meaning about what it means. And start downloading that on districts and schools in ways that are counterproductive.
Susan Lambert:Yeah, it's certainly true. And I think we started this episode with just that. It's that even now some folks think the Science of Reading is just, and only about, phonics instruction. And, although that's critical, and an important part, it's a much bigger body of evidence and body of research than just that. We'll be right back. Last time around, we told you we were sharing our final message on knowledge building from last year's cohort of Science of Reading Star Awards finalists. But I've got good news! We actually have one more message to share with you this time around. We're going to hear from Heather Campbell, a learning coach in southern Utah. Heather was a finalist for The Changemaker Award. Here's Heather.
Heather Campbell:When it comes to talking about knowledge and knowledge building with the Science of Reading, it really is important to make sure that the teachers understand how to do it in bite-sized pieces. Take what they're already doing and apply it in different ways. It is making sure that we're more explicit with vocabulary. And making sure that we're taking the knowledge strand and providing the students the prior knowledge they need in the content areas. So they will be successful with their comprehension later on. I am lucky to live in Utah where we have Senate Bill 127, which states that our current kindergartners, by the year 2027, when they are third graders, 70% of them will be reading at grade level. And for us, it's been really diving into what is grade level like? What does that look like? And it's helping the teachers understand the importance of increasing the rigor, and providing an equitable education for every single student in the classroom. So that wherever they go, and what future careers they choose, they will have the knowledge that they need in order to be successful and to have future jobs and careers.
Susan Lambert:That was Heather Campbell, learning coach from Sunset Elementary in Washington County School District in Utah. Heather was a finalist for The Changemaker Award. That was our final message from our 2023 cohort of the Science of Reading Star Award finalists. But applications are open for the 2024 Science of Reading Star Awards. Find out more information, and submit a nomination, at amplify.com/sor-star-awards. And now, back to our conversation with Dr. Sharon Vaughn. I wanna go back a little bit, not to plug your practice guide again, from the What Works Clearinghouse, but ... for grades four through nine, I do a lot of work with elementary teachers and educators. And more and more people are understanding the importance of read-alouds, and getting this background knowledge and vocabulary to kids, and texts that are well above their grade level, because they're not even reading yet. But even in this What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide, you remind fourth through ninth grade educators, in recommendation number three, about building a set of comprehension-building practices, or using a set of practices. And I know you don't have this memorized, but I have it in front of me. And it says two things. There's four parts to this. The first two parts are build students' world and word knowledge, and then consistently provide students with opportunities to ask and answer questions to better understand the text. And I think those two things are really interesting. Because one, I think upper-elementary and middle-grade teachers are not quite sure what this comprehension and knowledge building should look like. But we're still focusing on those things, right? In the upper elementary and middle grades. Word knowledge. World knowledge. Ask and answer questions. And get kids involved in this building of background knowledge. Did I get that right? Did I make a connection correctly?
Sharon Vaughn:I like that bridge. And it bridges beautifully to what we were talking about with background knowledge. World knowledge is just another way to say background knowledge. And word-reading is just another way to talk about what we were saying, where you have to be an efficient and accurate reader of words. And I keep using the word, "efficient." And the reason I do is because when you are slow and laborious, even if you are accurate, that slow, laborious reading keeps you from freeing up your cognitive resources in such a way that you can think about what you're reading. And you can hold multiple ideas in your head. And you can compose meaning so that you can read for understanding. And that's why that efficiency is so important. Especially when you get to fourth through ninth grade. Because without it, that really extensively slow reading bogs you down. So that by the time you reach the end of the paragraph, you can't possibly remember what the beginning of the paragraph was about. So, we really want to think about ways to improve efficiency. And that's why fluency ends up being important, even in those upper grades. And kicking back to your question about the strategies of asking and answering questions. Can we return to that as well, Susan ?
Susan Lambert:Yeah , please.
Sharon Vaughn:OK. So, here's why I wanna return to that. Asking questions is, as you know, extremely difficult. Asking the RIGHT questions. Asking questions that get students to think about, and wonder about, what they've read. And integrate it with what they know and think from other things . That's where the real learning juice is. Asking questions that require me to go back into the text and find one-word answers. You know, what color was the boy's hat when he was riding the pony? Well, I mean, I can find that, right? And I don't even necessarily have to know a lot about comprehension in order to do it. So, I don't think those questions are useless, but they're pretty close to useless. We really have to figure out how to ask questions. Like, what about how? Why? When did this happen? And why do you think the author wanted that? So, really, the quality of the question we ask has everything to do with the quality of the comprehension we can expect. And we think of these questions, Susan, as coming after students read. Not bad, you know, we should do some of that. But, it's also not a bad idea to say, "So far, here's what we've read about Napoleon. In the next page, something is going to happen that changes the way Napoleon thinks about how to lead men. As you read this, see if you can figure out what that is? And how that affected him?"
Susan Lambert:That's very thought-provoking, in terms of the quality of our comprehension. I think this is what you said. I'm gonna say it back to you again. The quality of the comprehension, or how we're assessing the quality of students' comprehension, is directly related to the types of questions we're asking, or the quality of the questions we're asking. So there's a relationship between those two things.
Sharon Vaughn:Thank you for putting a headline on those comments, because that's a really nice headline. Another headline along with yours is text matters. I think we have this idea for so long, Susan, that every child should know what their level is in their leveled reading. And every child should read in their leveled reading box. And golly, forbid if you pick up a harder or easier box. Well, I don't know about you, but how would you like to have a box that you could read in and not lower or higher?
Susan Lambert:<laugh> Yeah , no , thank you . That's interesting, because you also talk a lot about, I think this is right, nutrition as it relates to instruction, and making sure we have a good balance of that. Is that right?
Sharon Vaughn:I think so. In the guidance document that you referred to, one of the things they suggest, or we suggest, I can't blame them since I'm the first author, we suggest.
Susan Lambert:<Laugh>.
Sharon Vaughn:If you guys don't like it out there, it's not my fault; if you like it, I did the whole thing by myself <laugh>. But the recommendation is to integrate stretch-text into students reading. And the thinking behind that is that as students are behind, because this is focusing on students who are struggling readers, we need to understand that for many of these students, accessing grade level text has never occurred. So they have had a steady diet, if you will, of text that has limited background knowledge, marginalized vocabulary, and some text that's under-complicated. And because of the steady diet of that ... now, I don't think they should have none of that. People need to practice reading what they can't read. But they can't ONLY practice reading what they can't read. With strong teacher support, reading texts that are challenging can be interesting, fun, engaging, and profitable.
Susan Lambert:I like how you said that. Interesting, engaging, and profitable. Can you talk a little bit more about what you mean by profitable?
Sharon Vaughn:Well, what I mean is this. So, imagine, Susan, that I'm one of the students you're teaching. And imagine me as a fifth grader, which is not actually that hard. I act that way quite a bit <laugh> . And imagine that I read on the second-grade level. So you can imagine that over the last six years of my schooling, the kind of low-level, mind-numbing, simplified texts I've been exposed to, right? Because I have to read my level books. And they're all just exactly what you think. I think people do a really good job trying to make those books interesting. I am sometimes amazed at how interesting they make them. But nevertheless, I'm in fifth grade and these books are quite a bit simpler than what I am as a developed fifth grader. Now, imagine that there's a topic I'm interested in. And imagine you find a book about trains on the fourth-grade level. And we are able to work through it, because as a seasoned, knowledgeable teacher, you know what words to show me ahead of time. You know how to tell me how to re-read. You know how to read the paragraph first, before me, and say, "I'm gonna read it first and then you're gonna gonna read it." You know how to support me, so that accessing this text is profitable for me.
Susan Lambert:That's great. It's really helpful. A helpful reminder that education is about stretching, and growing, and helping our students access those things that they might not have been able to access without us. And so, that idea of helping kids get to what you're calling stretch-text is really great. I think you know something too about literacy instruction, that actively and effectively supports students' literacy development. And I'd love for you to talk about a couple of things. The first one is called Collaborative Strategic Reading, also known as CSR, because we like to shorten things <laugh> . Can you talk a little bit about CSR? And what it is? And why it's so effective?
Sharon Vaughn:Thank you for that invitation, because my colleagues Janette Klingner and I, and unfortunately Janette Klingner has passed away, which is very, very sad for me. That was probably about eight years ago or so. And she and I, all the way back when we were living in Miami, which was over 25 years ago, wondered how it was we could make classrooms, that is, what we think of as general education classrooms, more supportive of students who were challenged by reading. And how could we set something up? So that information text, again, thinking about background knowledge and vocabulary, was at the center of that. And we also knew too many strategies means you waste too much of students' cognitive processing on learning strategies, and not enough on learning reading. So with that in mind, we pulled together a set of practices that would be conducive to small-group reading. And in which students in the group would take on various roles to lead the group. So we would have a leader. We would have a gist expert, which is basically the main idea. We would have a summarization expert, that would put the gist together. And then we would have a clunk expert. And the clunk expert was somebody who would help the group when words were either too difficult because they were multi-syllable or because students couldn't figure out the meaning.
Susan Lambert:Did you say clunk expert? C-L-U-N-K?
Sharon Vaughn:Clunk, not cluck . This is not about chickens <laugh>.
Susan Lambert:OK, got it <laugh> .
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah . Clunk expert. Because we thought of a word when you're reading as being a clunk, it stopped you dead in your tracks and you couldn't go any further . So we had a set of strategies that we taught related to each of those practices. Clunk expert, gist expert, summarization expert. And we used information text. And students working in groups would help each other, because they would become experts at these. And then we would rotate expertise over the course of a year, so that, you know, in a six-month period, every student in the group would become an expert in each one of these things. And the idea was that once they practiced and became an expert in the group, it would generalize to other reading they would do throughout the day. And the teacher then would model these strategies, and support the groups, as students were reading it. But the initial work that we did was in whole-class, general-education settings. And we've done many studies. Students with disabilities, students who are English learners, students who are poor readers. And we've done studies in multiple states. CSR is consistently associated with improved outcomes, to the point where I kind of feel like, "Well, maybe I should do another CSR study." And actually, I am. I just started doing a CSR study with my colleague, Elizabeth Swanson and Phil Capin. And we're using CSR through computer-assisted instruction, in which we have texts of various levels, easier and harder, and in English and in Spanish, so that we are using CSR through computers. So we're just getting started, but we're really excited about the idea.
Susan Lambert:Wow! That's really interesting! And I have a question for you about the way that the strategy is then employed during instruction. So, each of these individual experts, if you will, are actually there though in service of increasing the knowledge that the kids are gaining from the text, right? So we're putting the content first, but these strategies are coming up to support the learning of that content. Is that right?
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah.
Susan Lambert:So it's not the strategy for strategy's sake, right?
Sharon Vaughn:Oh , that's right. Thank you. You always do such a nice job summarizing what I've said. I appreciate it <laugh>.
Susan Lambert:That's really very interesting. And so, in your study using computers or technology, what makes it different than the in-classroom kind of stuff that you did previously?
Sharon Vaughn:Well, we're just getting started. This is a brand new study that we just had funded. And right now we're building the text base, so we're trying to get background knowledge. Let's say we're talking about the history of Egypt, which is one of the content areas students need to learn. We are building a cadre of easier and harder text on every topic, so that students can use the easier text to then access the harder text. The idea is that you can start with the easier text to kind of get some of the background knowledge so that the harder text is easier to read. And we're also then using the strategies of CSR to help with comprehension around those texts.
Susan Lambert:That makes sense. So, in other words, the technology being employed here is in relationship to the text?
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah.
Susan Lambert:And the increased difficulty of the text. OK. Thank you for that clarification. And I think this is what we would call, somewhat of, a replication study. Is that what this might be? Is that we're seeingiIf it can work? Or maybe is it in a different context?
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah, I think replication studies can be either direct replications, in which they literally replicate everything that was done in previous studies, or they are extended replications. So I think of this more as an extended replication.
Susan Lambert:Yeah, that makes sense. When was the first time that you actually studied CSR?
Sharon Vaughn:Whoa, I'm gonna say it was like in '95.
Susan Lambert:And the reason I say that is, because I think we forget, or maybe we don't even realize, maybe some newer educators don't even realize how often we sort of build on this research. Things that we see work, and we replicate, like you said, and extend on that replication. And continue to work out. That's part of the scientific process.
Sharon Vaughn:You know, in fact, back to the Science of Reading, which we can't leave behind <laugh> , and that is that if you look at the early studies from the late eighties and early nineties, they really were the building blocks for phonemic awareness and phonics. And the way in which we have identified the foundation skills as being essential. So, we act like the Science of Reading is something new, and we've been building this for decades.
Susan Lambert:Yeah, that is a great point. That's a great reminder of how long this actually takes to get these things right. So, does it bother you or surprise you that we're still talking about the reading wars, or trying to get this instruction right in the classroom?
Sharon Vaughn:You know, what bothers me is that it has challenged us to get this practice up and running. I think teaching is hard, but I hardly think that teaching reading is something that we have not understood. We've understood this for a long time. And the principles and practices that are so fundamental to what makes a difference for students having access to print is not novel. And any arguments and discussions that are unreasonable around it frustrate me. Yes.
Susan Lambert:Well that's coming from somebody that's dedicated a really long time to this whole process. So, thank you for that. I'd love to ask you about one more project that you worked on called Project PACT. Can you tell us a little bit about that?
Sharon Vaughn:You know, Susan, I was just actually working on that this morning. Because I was putting a speech together about the four randomized controlled trials that we've done on PACT, which is promoting and accelerating comprehension for adolescents. And it's through text, it's a text-based approach. Again, primarily information text. A little bit of hybrid text, and by hybrid text I mean narrative and information. Kind of like biography is a hybrid text. But we like to keep our text nutritious, so that students learn things, and build background knowledge, and increase their vocabulary. And PACT is also a class-wide practice, meaning that it's done in classrooms with a range of learners. And it has been associated with improved outcomes for that entire range of learners. So we have outcomes for English learners, students with reading difficulties , etc. And the set of practices really starts with what we think of as a comprehension canopy. So, we sort of think about a unit, maybe a week-long or two-week unit, and what the big overarching idea is to learn about in that unit. So, again, building on background knowledge. And then within that, what some of the key constructs or vocabulary words are. So we know we can't teach all of 'em, but we wanna teach some of the nuggets each week. And then we also work very hard to be sure that students work in teams . So it's team-based learning. It's not cooperative learning, which is what CSR is. But team-based learning means that students demonstrate what they learn from the text independently, and then they work in their team to give feedback, and go back and revisit it. So team-based learning, Susan, actually came out of universities, in which they were using it in things like pharmacy, and nursing, and medicine. To make sure that individuals as well as groups learned all they needed to learn. And we applied it to middle school and high school, quite successfully. And then, of course, there's a set of instructional practices very similar to the ones in CSR. So there's a lot of overlap, because these are effective practices, but there's a lot of independence as well. This one is much more text-based, and much more content, background-knowledge-based.
Susan Lambert:And when you say some of the strategies, can you just paint a picture of what it would look like in a classroom during a lesson when PACT was being utilized?
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah, thank you for that. Well, it's kind of hard to do that, because every day focuses on something a little different. It is a set of practices, but what I can say, and we encourage people to do this, is go to our website, which is really easy to remember. So it's www.meadowscenter.org. So the beautiful meadow, only with an "s" on it. And we have sample lessons there. I find it very hard to do without pictures, and without instruction, to really portray this multiple set of practices.
Susan Lambert:Well, we will also link the listeners in our show notes to that. And just to reiterate, this is middle and high school. So this is sort of an upper-grades strategy or project.
Sharon Vaughn:Yeah. We're working on an elementary version of it right now. So we're just getting ready to do some of our initial efficacy trials . So we'll have more information on that in the next year or two.
Susan Lambert:Great. Well, we'll follow that on the website. Thank you for pointing us in that direction. I appreciate it. There's been a lot of Dr. Sharon Vaughn nuggets <laugh> in the last 45 minutes, so thank you for including all those. I just wonder if you have any final thoughts for our listeners? Anything that you would like to share?
Sharon Vaughn:Well, the one thing I wanna share is I wanna thank the listeners, because I feel like I preached to the already converted <laugh> . So anyone listening to your show already probably knows many of the things firsthand that we talked about. And sometimes they just look for affirmation. And so I hope some of the things that we have said today provide the kind of affirmation your very capable listening group already knows.
Susan Lambert:Well, thank you for that. And I would add to that, for those that are listening, share this episode with those folks that maybe are looking to learn more about the Science of Reading. 'Cause Dr. Sharon Vaughn is actually one of those pillars of the Science of Reading. Someone who's been around. And who knows this work. And has done this work. So I really appreciate you joining us today. It was a real honor, and pleasure, to be able to chat with you. And good luck on the research that you're doing right now. We will definitely keep up on that.
Sharon Vaughn:Thank you. And thanks for being such a great interviewer. I was lucky to work with you.
Susan Lambert:Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Dr. Sharon Vaughn. Dr. Vaughn is the Manuel J. Justiz endowed chair in education and executive director of The Meadow Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas, Austin. Check out the show notes for links to some of the resources we discussed, including the What Works Clearinghouse Practice Guide providing reading intervention for students in grades four through nine. We'd be thrilled to hear your takeaways from this conversation. Please add to the conversation in our Facebook discussion group, Science of Reading: The Community, Science of Reading: The Podcast is brought to you by Amplify. For more information on how Amplify leverages the Science of Reading, go to amplify.com/ckla. Next time on the show, I'll be joined by Dr. Greg Ashman for a fascinating conversation about Cognitive Load Theory and how it can be applied in an education setting.
Greg Ashman:People think of memory in quite a reduced and limited way. They think about memorizing facts or you know, the date of a battle and they think that's what memory is. But to us, in Cognitive Load Theory, memory is a much more expansive thing. So the ability to hit a ball in a certain way is actually something that is stored in long-term memory.
Susan Lambert:That's coming up next time. Don't miss that. Or any other upcoming episodes by subscribing to Science of Reading: The Podcast, wherever you find your podcasts. While you're there, please consider leaving us a rating and review. Thank you again for listening.