Our beliefs construct what we notice, which constructs what we believe. So noticing on purpose and questioning those beliefs is pure genius.
—Jennifer Garvey Berger and Carolyn Coughlin, Unleash Your Complexity Genius
Since sharing a series of questions when selecting a new literacy curriculum resource in 2022, I have continued to receive requests about the best way to approach this process.
- “How did you arrive at the program you currently use?”
- “Were there any key factors that led to your recommendation?”
- “What resources did you find helpful in your decision?”
I have been happy to share reflections on my own experience in selecting a core program.
What I have not been willing to share is a recommendation for using a specific resource. This is a decision that is best made at the local district level.
It’s not that I don’t believe in the program we picked. What I want to acknowledge is that I brought my own beliefs and biases into this work. More so, I recognize that my beliefs about literacy instruction have changed over time.
For example, before we even began the process of reviewing programs, I held the firm belief that schools can succeed without the purchase of any commercially produced literacy curriculum programs. In fact, I still do, to some degree. If a school district were committed to sustained professional development that included resources, support, and feedback for teachers over multiple years, a packaged curriculum may not be necessary. Teachers would have the capacity and the professional trust to develop a curriculum that meets kids where they are.
Yet as we began to engage in the process, I realized I may have held too tightly to this belief. This came about for me as we compared different resources. Not all of the programs filled the day with excerpts, comprehension questions, and workbooks. Some valued literacy practices that I also valued deeply, including classroom libraries and independent reading.
Once a program was selected and our school began implementing it in classrooms, I also reexamined my belief that commercially produced literacy curriculum programs are not effective in teaching all students to become successful readers, writers, thinkers, and communicators.
My bias was based on my previous experiences as a classroom teacher. When these programs were used like a script, the result was groups of students experiencing inequitable access to effective instruction.
This second belief was called into question when, as a principal, I observed a classroom teacher and special education teacher working together.
They collaborated closely around one student, a second grader. This student had previously received multiple code-based interventions, yet had not made a lot of progress as a reader. His fluency was still choppy. He had also recently gotten a diagnosis of ADHD. This at least partially explained why he was struggling to read: He was expending so much energy simply trying to focus on the text in front of him that to employ his new skills learned during intervention within the general classroom was a leap too far.
Because we had purchased the intervention support materials that complemented the core program, the special education teacher and classroom teacher were able to create a more coherent literacy experience for this student.
Here is the process they used:
- Before a reading minilesson was taught, the classroom teacher informed the special education teacher what text-plus-lesson she would be using the next day.
- The special education teacher pulled the intervention materials that corresponded with that lesson.
- The day before, the special education teacher and the student would preview the upcoming lesson’s text. They would explore the key vocabulary, discuss any necessary background knowledge, and make predictions about what he would learn. The intervention materials gave the student an opportunity to engage with the text using the same vocabulary and topics, but at a slightly lower readability.
- The next day, the student came to the general classroom prepared for the lesson. Because he had had an opportunity to preview what the class would be learning, he demonstrated more confidence and success as a reader.
This confidence led to the student reaching grade-level proficiency by the end of the school year. (For more information on the previewing strategy, check out the examples from Learning-Focused here.)
After learning about this experience, it was more difficult to hold on to my belief that commercially produced literacy curriculum programs are not effective in teaching all students. The evidence was clear.
And if that belief is called into question, then what about the idea that “schools can succeed without the purchase of any commercially produced literacy curriculum programs”? Could these teachers have coordinated as effectively on behalf of this student without the resources made available to them? Maybe. But the amount of time and energy that these teachers would have needed to develop the materials to support this approach would have been substantial.
Changing one’s mind in today’s educational world can feel risky. We fear looking incompetent or like we don’t know what we believe. I’ve learned that, as a leader, sharing how my thinking and my beliefs around literacy instruction has changed has actually increased the level of respect from others. It shows that I am a learner, an essential identity in a complex world.
Questions to Consider When Examining Your Current Beliefs
- What do I believe about literacy instruction?
- Why do I believe what I currently believe? What experiences in my life led to this thinking?
- What if what I believed was wrong? Really imagine this situation. Then ask, What would I need to see or hear to be convinced that my current beliefs are wrong?
- How would I respond to colleagues who still believed in what I previously believed? What would that conversation sound like? What would be my goal in that interaction?
