Literacy Now

In classrooms across the country, teachers encounter a puzzling situation: A student reads fluently, even confidently, yet struggles to make sense of the text. It’s a disconnect that can leave educators frustrated and puzzled. How can a “good” reader still miss the meaning of what they read? In an era when schools are under pressure to produce data-driven results, the meaning behind those numbers often gets lost.

This dilemma, explored by Mary DeKonty Applegate, Anthony J. Applegate, and Virginia B. Modla in an article for The Reading Teacher, highlights a core problem in literacy assessment. The tools we use to measure reading are not always aligned with what it truly means to read. For many schools, Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) and other curriculum-based measures (CBMs) have become the primary way of monitoring student progress. These assessments track how quickly and accurately students can read connected text.

On the surface, this seems useful. After all, a child who struggles to read fluently will likely struggle to comprehend. But here’s the catch: Fluency assessments alone tell us little about whether students actually understand what they read. A student who races through text at an impressive words-per-minute rate may still be unable to make inferences, connect ideas, or construct meaning. This is the goal of reading and what we do as adults. When this happens, we risk confusing fast reading with real reading. 

This challenge isn’t new. In an article for Literacy Now, Peter Johnston warned that while CBMs provide a quick snapshot of fluency, they are often treated as comprehensive measures of reading. They are not. As Johnston argued, comprehension is not an “add-on” to fluency; rather, it is the heart of reading.

Louise Rosenblatt’s transactional theory offers a powerful lens for understanding why these measures fall short. Rosenblatt argued that reading is a transaction between the reader and the text, where meaning is constructed through engagement, reflection, and response. Similarly, researchers such as P. David Pearson and Gina N. Cervetti as well as Nell Duke and Kelly Cartwright have reinforced that the end goal of reading is comprehension—an active process of making meaning—not simply decoding words on a page. Phonics and fluency provide essential access to print, but they are not the destination.

As Tim Pressley, Richard Allington, and Michael Pressley noted in Reading Instruction That Works, skilled readers constantly monitor for understanding, making predictions, and revising interpretations as they read. When assessment reduces reading to a timed score, it overlooks this complex interplay of cognitive and affective processes that foster deep comprehension. Reading becomes performance, not meaning-making. Therefore, the very heart of literacy is lost.

The narrowing of reading

This concept shows up in everyday classroom practice. One example I have observed is the insistence that students answer comprehension questions without referring back to the book. The rationale is often that students should “remember” what they read, but then comes the moment when a student asks the teacher about a particular part in the text and the teacher reaches for the book to check. That right there says it all. Authentic readers rely on the text. We revisit, reread, and reference constantly. To deny students this process sends the wrong message: That reading is about memory, not meaning. 

Some might argue that asking students to recall what they discussed in class demonstrates comprehension. But isn’t that really just testing memory? As Rosenblatt would remind us: Comprehension cannot be captured in a single recall task. It unfolds as readers transact with the text, shifting between the efferent stances (focused on information) and the aesthetic stances (focused living variously through the lives of the characters). When we block students from revisiting the text, we cut them off from this essential back and forth process of constructing and remaking meaning.

When reading becomes a performance, engagement fades and meaning, and the heart of reading, comprehension, is lost.

Where does this leave us?

It doesn’t mean we should throw out fluency assessments altogether. They serve an important purpose, especially for identifying students who need additional support with automaticity and word recognition. But we cannot stop there. If fluency becomes the whole story, we risk raising readers who are quick but shallow, efficient but disengaged. This is where differentiation becomes essential. Every reader brings unique strengths, needs, and processing styles to the act of reading. Some students may need targeted fluency practice, others benefit more from explicit phonics instruction to strengthen decoding, still others may thrive through modeling comprehension strategies, guided peer led discussions, or guided questioning. Differentiation ensures that instruction aligns with what each student truly needs to grow, not just how fast they can read, but how deeply they can think and apply their understanding to live responsibility in society. 

Instead, we need a more balanced approach to assessment. Pairing oral reading measures with authentic comprehension tasks gives us a fuller picture of reading ability. Tasks that invite students to annotate, cite evidence, and engage in meaningful peer led discussions. Might we even see motivation increase when students read to find messages they can apply to their world. Allowing students to return to the text doesn’t weaken comprehension checks; it strengthens them by mirroring how reading works in the real world. 

Pause and reflect

• Are we measuring what matters most? 
• Are we giving students opportunities to practice the kinds of reading behaviors real readers use every day? 
• Are our assessment choices shaping instruction that builds not only speed but also depth of understanding? 

Ultimately, it’s time to move beyond the narrow definitions of reading and towards a more balanced approach that honors both fluency and comprehension. Our best readers should not be praised solely for how quickly they move through text but for how deeply they can transact with it. After all, as Roseblatt, Johnston, and the Applegates remind us in different ways, comprehension is not just the outcome of reading; rather, it is reading.  

Learn More

No Empty Shelves: 10 Ways to Eliminate "Book Deserts" in Schools

Defining and Refining Equitable Vocabulary Instruction for English Language Learners

The October/November/December 2025 issue of Literacy Today, ILA’s member magazine, explores the importance of literacy coaching and how it ties in with curriculum and community.

Our guest editor for this edition, Sara Gonzalez Flechas, is a founding member of GL Books and the Literacy Center. A passionate literacy coach and advocate for bilingual students, Sarah currently serves as the national academic director leading curriculum design, teacher training, and literacy implementation across public and private institutions.

“Literacy work is never done in isolation. It thrives when we learn from one another, when we take risks, and when we keep students at the center of everything we do,” she wrote in her opening note to readers.  

Read on to learn more about the issue, how Sara approached its curation, and what she hopes readers take away from it.

Tell us how you developed your vision for this issue.

My vision for this issue was shaped by what is happening right now in Colombia. Over the past few years, we’ve been intentionally positioning literacy—not traditional EFL approaches—as a powerful and evidence-based alternative for teaching English. It has been a slow but meaningful process, and every step reinforces that the strongest results emerge when we move away from methods that, after many years, have not produced the outcomes our students deserve.

For this reason, I wanted this issue to spotlight the Colombian context and the people driving these changes. I invited Claudia González and Alberto Lozano because they have been central to rethinking English teaching in Colombia and are actively advancing research-based practices. In addition, Lauren Hegarty, Diego Garzón, Mariana Ocampo Hernández, and Carolina Caipa’s work shows what is possible when schools embrace literacy and coaching as long-term commitments—small-scale transformations that can grow into national impact. Their articles reflect a continuum: From early childhood to primary and secondary school, and even, as I mentioned in my article, system-wide implementation in public education. Together, they portray a country in motion.

How did you approach selecting contributors? What important thread ties them together?

I chose contributors whose work reflects the real challenges—and real possibilities—of doing things differently in Colombia. While each author comes from a distinct context and perspective, they share a common thread: They are practitioners who are courageously reshaping English teaching through literacy and coaching.

Their collective contributions offer a full panorama of the impact literacy can have. Tatiana Charry’s article brings us into kindergarten classrooms, while John Oyuela’s piece extends to professional development and systems-level change. Each one helps build a wide-angle view of the essential work happening across levels, regions, and school types. Together, they show a unified story: Literacy matters, and it is transforming learning in Colombia.

Your opening letter mentions how essential it is that literacy work is "never done in isolation." Can you expand upon that thinking?

In Colombia, talking about literacy immediately implies collaboration, because no part of the system can shift on its own. Real change requires participation from teachers, principals, coordinators, and families—and even students themselves.

Tatiana highlights this beautifully in her article, showing how young learners thrive when teachers and families work together. Mariana and Carolina describe how implementing a reading program was only possible because coordinators, teachers, and the principal approached the process as a shared challenge and a shared responsibility. Across schools and communities, we see that literacy grows when everyone involved understands that there is an alternative way to approach English.

This is why I intentionally included voices from all sectors and all grade levels—from pre-kindergarten to professional educators. Literacy truly is collective work.

What are some of the biggest misconceptions about literacy coaching in your experience, and how does this issue address them?

One of the biggest misconceptions is that a coach is simply an observer whose role is to evaluate or judge. In Colombia, the term “literacy coach” is not commonly used in schools, and the role is often misunderstood or, in many cases, nonexistent. In my recent work in schools in El Salvador, I found the same challenge—so much so that I recommended creating the position as part of the school structure. A coach is not there to critique from the sidelines; a coach is an active partner in the learning process.

Another misconception is that coaching is limited to supporting teachers. Literacy coaching must be present in the classroom, working directly with instruction, with students, and with the school’s curricular decisions. It is hands-on, collaborative, and centered on improving practice in real time.

This issue illustrates these ideas by showing coaches and teachers working side-by-side, reflecting together, and transforming everyday classroom interactions

What do you hope readers will take away from this issue of Literacy Today, and how do you envision it sparking further conversation about literacy coaching?

I hope readers walk away with at least two things: A renewed willingness to question traditional approaches to language teaching, especially in multilingual or bilingual contexts, and a collection of practical, realistic ideas they can bring into their schools, classrooms, or teacher training programs.

I also hope this issue encourages educators to talk more openly about literacy coaching—not as an extra role or a luxury, but as a central component of instructional transformation. My wish is that readers begin asking:

• What would change if we saw literacy coaching as essential, not optional?
• How can coaching help us break long-standing patterns and move toward evidence-based teaching?
• What might English education look like if literacy were the foundation rather than an add-on?

If this issue sparks these conversations—and inspires teams to explore literacy as a path to more equitable, effective English learning—then it will have done exactly what I hoped.

Learn More

Defining and Refining Equitable Vocabulary Instruction for English Language Learners

Literacy Today magazine: Coaching Across Borders

Barbara J. Walker, a compassionate teacher and influential scholar whose lifelong devotion to literacy touched countless educators and students, died on November 12, 2025. She was 79.

Walker served as the president of the International Reading Association (IRA; now the International Literacy Association) from 2008–2009. She began her work as a reading specialist in Oklahoma before serving in various roles that reflected her belief in the global importance of literacy. 

Walker earned her PhD in Curriculum Studies at Oklahoma State University (OSU) and went on to lead the Reading Clinic at Montana State University Billings before returning to OSU as a professor of reading. Her research centered on reading difficulties, teacher development, and literacy coaching—areas in which she became widely recognized for both her expertise and compassion.

A prolific author, Walker wrote extensively on diagnostic reading instruction, literacy coaching, and effective intervention for struggling readers. To this day, her books and teaching frameworks continue to guide reading specialists and classroom teachers. She also received numerous honors for her scholarship, including the College Reading Association’s A.B. Herr Award and distinction as a Regents Distinguished Professor for Research.

As president of IRA, Walker provided steady leadership during a time of evolving literacy practices. She supported the growing recognition of modern literacies and reaffirmed IRA’s commitment to equitable reading instruction for all learners.

Walker’s legacy continues to endure in the educators she mentored, the readers whose lives she helped change, and the professional community she served with integrity and compassion. Her impact will continue to shape literacy education for years to come.

You may make a donation in Walker’s honor here.

Strong vocabulary instruction is one of the most essential components in building a strong literacy foundation within education. Whether it be reading the description of a particular food item from a menu, filling out a job application, or decoding the questions on any licensing exam, vocabulary has been—and still remains—one of the most relevant aspects of our everyday lives.

It is critical that we as educators adapt our teaching approaches and remain up-to-date on the latest branches of vocabulary instruction. The intention of this article is to discuss the meaning of effective vocabulary, the difficulties English language learners (ELLs) face when learning vocabulary instruction in comparison to their native English-speaking peers, and effective vocabulary teaching strategies beneficial for ELL students’ literacy development throughout their academic journey.

So the first, and arguably most important question here is: What exactly is vocabulary and what determines if it is effective instruction? 

Defining vocabulary

Vocabulary refers to the words we know to communicate effectively. Vocabulary knowledge, otherwise known as the knowledge of word meanings, is primary in understanding and using language. However, when discussing the different approaches that are constructive in providing our ELL students with effective vocabulary instruction, one of the most central components is to define the actual meaning of "effective" in this context. According to the Journal of Educational Psychology, effective vocabulary instruction can be defined as:

A deliberate process of explicitly teaching words to students through interactive activities that maximize opportunities for them to hear and use new vocabulary in meaningful contexts. This method includes providing clear definitions, ensuring repeated exposure to words in different situations, and engaging students in deep processing of the words' meanings.

An example of how this can be demonstrated is through a “turn and talk” exercise. After reading an intriguing story that utilizes specific vocabulary words within the text, ask students to write a sentence and draw a picture that relates to the definition. This is great for encouraging students to draw connections from their own prior knowledge. The ability to apply effective vocabulary skills is key to the progression of comprehension in all students.

The National Reading Panel implied that vocabulary instruction is considered to be effective when taught both explicitly and incidentally. Further research has also revealed that, for ELL students, targeted instruction aimed to enhance effective vocabulary is crucial. This is to combat the challenges they face navigating through each grade with an abundance of content area texts and challenging academic language. Ultimately, effective vocabulary among ELL students can be described as one’s ability to understand a word’s meaning and apply it in the appropriate context.

Vocabulary’s role in literacy 

Research has shown that the words our students know can have a huge impact on their ability to comprehend different texts. In other words, a students’ vocabulary impacts their comprehension abilities. When focusing on students among marginalized communities, we must be very considerate of the linguistic, academic, and social-emotional challenges they navigate while teaching crucial aspects of vocabulary instruction throughout the development of their literacy education.

Even though prior research has given educators access to helpful information that allows them to expand literacy education among ELL students, the gaps in literature pertaining to effective vocabulary instruction are unambiguous and should be considered when selecting vocabulary strategies to target literacy instruction for this particular community of students. The understanding of words is representative of knowledge, and knowledge about the topic of a text strongly predicts a student’s ability to comprehend the text.

This is just scratching the surface as to why it is so vital that ELL students are equipped with constructive vocabulary instruction. To assess if an ELL student comprehended the meaning behind a text is to ask them to orally summarize what they’ve learned. Rather than asking them to complete a cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all assessment that typically requires students to provide written responses, we must be mindful of the linguistic barriers. We should be continuously implementing a sense of equity into our assessment practices rather than just equality. This approach allows students to cultivate a more individualized route to express their understanding of a text, which not only enhances conversational skills, but expands their vocabulary knowledge as well.

Having had firsthand experience myself as a student with different, but equally challenging obstacles, I know that having one teacher willing to go the extra mile can and does make all the difference.

Further reading

• Supporting vocabulary development within a multitiered system of support, Journal of Educational Psychology
• The Core Vocabulary: The Foundation of Proficient Comprehension, The Reading Teacher
• Handbook of Research on Literacy and Diversity edited by Diane Lapp, Lesley Mandel Morrow, and Robert Rueda
• Inequalities in the Early Years by Michael Sampson

Claudia Rose Addeo, PhD, is duel certified in both elementary and literacy education. As a neurodiverse leaner herself, Addeo spends much of her time advocating for the community. Addeo was the recipient of the 2024 John Beach Award for Outstanding Achievement in the PhD Literacy Program at St. John’s University. After spending five years working with students ranging from grades K-8, Addeo is now a professor at St. John’s University.

Learn More

No Empty Shelves: 10 Ways to Eliminate "Book Deserts" in Schools

Literacy Today magazine: Coaching Across Borders

As a literacy professional, I've had the unique opportunity to travel to visit schools and attend conferences with Pre-K–12 colleagues from around the country. Additionally, I spent time in teacher groups via social media talking to teachers about their concerns over the lack of resources within schools. More specifically, conversations tend to include issues related to lack of access to books for teachers. This unfortunate reality also includes students getting less access to physical books.

For the past eight years, I have delved into research, service, and teaching related to eliminating "book deserts" within schools, correctional facilities, and communities. My earlier efforts can be traced back to grant work in this area. It is important to me that I ensure my recommendations related to book deserts also include actionable models and practical solutions to prevent this phenomenon from occurring in local schools, communities, and correctional facilities.

We still need to support additional research work in this area to document this stark reality. However, the need to ensure that we are also putting together sound practices that prevent book deserts in rural and urban areas is imperative. Therefore, I offer 10 suggestions for schools looking to address the pressing reality of book deserts.

10 Recommendations for Schools to Prevent Book Deserts

• School boards and school districts should allocate funding specifically for the purchase of high-interest books in various genres. This should include ordering books from graphic novels to nonfiction texts. 
• Every school needs a year-round book donation program. The program should include letters that go out to donors, volunteers, and the community regarding books. The books can be donated, or people can donate monetary donations.
• Every school should partner with local community libraries to get copies of texts they sell at the end of the month for monthly fundraising. This will allow schools the opportunity to fill both shelves in the library and classroom libraries.
• Every early childhood, elementary, and middle grade teacher should set a goal of having 250-500 high-interest books in their classroom libraries for students.
• Every media specialist should have a ‘no empty shelves’ movement in their media center to ensure that there are ample books in every genre and sub-genre in the library.
• Schools should consider hosting book giveaways each month. This will allow students to build their own libraries.
• Every principal or assistant principal should make sure there are high-interest books in every area of the school for students to have access and to engage in reading.
• Every school should have a school volunteer reading program every Friday where volunteers read high-interest books to children in grades Pre-K through fifth grade. This will allow children to have books read to them on a more frequent basis.
• Every school should have a book buddy program where children in grades four and five read to a child in grades Pre-K through second grade.
• Every school should set up a Little Free Library for every 5-10 block radius of the school to ensure children have access to books when school is not in session.

Potentially, there are many ways to prevent book deserts within schools. However, until we deal with the reality of what this means for children in rural and urban areas with little access to physical books or the internet, we will continue to see children without access to books in local schools.

Book deserts are not a problem that can solely be solved with access to free digital books. The need for physical books to give children the experience of flipping pages and interacting with real books is still crucial for most of the children we work with each day. As literacy professionals, it is imperative we review the literacy practices in our schools and districts for the students and families we serve to ensure equity. 

We must enact new ideas to ensure we serve children in the most creative fashion imaginable. We must create policies and procedures which consider fairness for children who are in underserved communities. Additionally, we must provide access to books for the most vulnerable children to ensure we pique the reading interests of children.    

Tiffany A. Flowers, PhD, is the Marie Berrell Endowed Professor of Literacy and director of the Literacy Center at Central Michigan University. She is a native Chicagoan with a doctorate in language, literacy, and culture from the University of Iowa.

Learn More

Centering Bilingual Books in Every Literacy Classroom

Literacy Today magazine: Thinking Critically