Many states have mandated that teachers review/learn the components of research-based literacy instruction. The mandated requirements of literacy knowledge and instruction usually follow the Structured Literacy Model. Implementing this information into classroom instructional lessons has proven to be a challenge.
After a bill becomes law, it usually takes time to trickle down through the levels of educators. A new education law is sent to the state education department, where the bill is analyzed and a plan is developed to implement its requirements. State educators are often consulted for the verbiage and passage of a bill, which may ease the development of an implementation plan. Once a plan has been realized, the new law moves to the district level and the components of the plan are analyzed for implementation based on the district’s knowledge and resources. Implementation of the bill may look somewhat different in each district; this will be dependent on the district’s size and resources. Often this means that district leaders need to be educated on the components of the bill and how they might effectively implement the law. An implementation timeline is usually developed based on the wording of the bill and state requirements. Then the implementation process of the new bill then moves to the school level. Again, the educators present may need to complete research and education based on the knowledge needed to begin implementation. Effective implementation of a new bill usually takes place when educators understand the importance or there is buy-in of the legislation. Any new educational law should also be considered for future teacher training programs.
The Structured Literacy model should be incorporated into each tier of literacy instruction (response to intervention (RTI)/multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS). The components and principles at each tier should remain the same, while the intensity of instruction will differ at each level of instruction. RTI/MTSS was mandated in the 2002 No Child Left Behind Act and the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004). The RTI name can be, at times, confusing as some educators have attached the RTI name to discipline instead of literacy instruction. The method can be effect for both types of programs. I am beginning to see the RTI name move more towards MTSS within research articles. This may change in the years to come. The important thing is that educators specify the type of program – discipline or literacy.
The Structured Literacy model focuses on these components of literacy instruction: (a) phonemic awareness, (b) phoneme-grapheme correspondence, (c) syllables, (d) morphology, and (e) semantics. Learning each of these components is dependent on student oral language skills and how their brain initially develops the highways and byways to grow the necessary literacy skills to effectively process written language. Reading and writing skills are learned skills that require students to grow additional connections to their initial genetic brain processing structure. Most students are challenged with learning how to read and write. Some students who do not have the “normal” brain processing structure, already developed, are simultaneously working to create the “normal” byways and highways and expanding the “normal” pathways to create the necessary connections to effectively process written words. Many of these students are dyslexic and often seem to not possess a learning disability. Structured literacy embraces the following instructional principles: (a) learn the foundational skills of current lesson, (b) systematic instruction, (c) explicit direct instruction, (d) scaffolding instruction, (e)interactive discussion, (f) practice of new skill, and (g) progress monitoring.
Tier 1 should focus on grade-level instruction that meets 80% of present students. The curriculum should be based on state mandated outcomes for that grade-level. The state mandated outcomes are usually based on vetted research and should be adjusted as new information is revealed through valid research. Classroom curriculum should be developed or adopted based on current vetted research topics being taught. Can adjustments be made to curriculum to better serve the students being taught? Of course, but it should remain grade-level. This is when differentiation and scaffolding may be useful to stay true the grade-level task or concept. Each new concept should be taught using the I do, We do, You do scaffolding process.
Tier 2 instruction should focus on students who are struggling to master grade-level (Tier 1) skills. Educators should use data gathered through multiple avenues, like observation or formative assessments. This level of instruction is usually taught to smaller groups of students (1-6) to increase the intensity of instruction. Occasionally, educators may have a classroom where the majority of students are behind a grade-level or two or they are not mastering a new grade-level concept. This is when educators should tap into Tier 2 instructional methods, like breaking down a concept into different components or remodeling from a different angle about how to complete the task. Tier 2 instruction might also revisit previously taught concepts to patch student “holes”. This might include using more multisensory techniques, such as a chart or graph to scaffold the learning of the concept. Progress monitoring or assessment of skills taught should take place every week or two.
Tier 3 is for students who struggling to own Tier 2 instruction. Tier 3 instruction should be an increase of intensity, with the use of more multisensory tools. This instruction should be based on assessment data gathered through diagnostic, formative, observational, and summative assessments. Tier 3 instruction usually takes place five days a week in a one-to-one group setting. Progress monitoring usually happens every two weeks. Instruction is adjusted based on daily data to better serve the student being taught. Students at this level of instruction usually have an Individual Educational Plan (IEP) or a 504.
It is important to note that not all RTI/MTSS models have three layers of instruction, some have five or six levels of instruction.
Students learn better when taught in their “sweet spot” or zone of proximal development. This is when students are ready for the next progressional step of a topic or task. When students own the prerequisites of a topic or tasks, the topic makes sense and eases their frustration of learning the new concept.
References
Ray, J. S. (2017) Tier 2 interventions for students in grades 1-3 identified as at-risk in reading. (Doctoral dissertation). https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/egi/
Ray, J.S. (2020) Structured literacy supports all learners: students at-risk of literacy acquisition – dyslexia and english learners. Texas Association for Literacy Education Yearbook, 7(5), 37-43. http://www.texasreaders.org/yearbooks.html

regions work as a team to read written words. https://www.zaner-bloser.com/research/building-the-reading-brain
he “lazy” look. These individuals usually need direct, explicit instruction to help develop the necessary connections in the left side of the brain.