LETRS: Adventures in Baloney Land

Tuesday, December 10, 2024, 7:00 PM EST, 6:00 PM CST, 4:00 PM PST

Free Webinar -- Context Matters: LETRS, SoR Research Standards, and Baloney

?

The good Dr. Louisa Moats (2019) defines the science of reading as:

“It (SoR) is the emerging consensus from many related disciplines, based on literally thousands of studies, supported by hundreds of millions of research dollars, conducted across the world in many languages.”

SoR Standards for Strategies and Practice

The SoR seems to refer to:

1. Strategies and practices that a consensus of researchers has determined to lead to improved reading outcomes.

?2. Strategies and practices that have been determined to be effective using experimental or quasi-experimental research.

3. Strategies and practices in which a causal variable has been linked by research to an outcome related to reading achievement

4. Strategies and practices based on research conducted in actual classroom learning environments.

5. Strategies and practices that have been fairly compared to something similar.

To be a science of reading means that you use strategies and practices that meet these five criteria. ??Figure 1 presents a basic SoR definition.

SoR Research Standards

The five SoR criteria above are used to define the SOR research standard.? To be SoR-approved, this research standard must be used to determine the efficacy of a strategy, practice, or program and the soundness of a policy (see Figure 2).

LETRS

Dr. Louisa Moats developed LETRS, a professional development program for teachers.? In Minnesota, this is one of three state-approved professional development programs that teachers can take.? In looking at LETRS, one should be assured that one would be able to find at least one of the “literally thousands of studies, supported by hundreds of millions of research dollars, conducted across the world in many languages” that Dr. Moats is referencing.? We should be assured that these “literally thousands of studies” would demonstrate a causal link between LETRS professional development and (a) teachers’ ability to teach reading effectively or (b) readers’ ability to read effectively.?? One should further be assured that one could find at least one of the “literally thousands” of controlled experimental research studies comparing LETRS to other forms of professional development.? This, after all, is the SoR research standard.

However, there are relatively few.? And as we’ll see in my December 10, 2024 webinar the research studies that have been referenced don’t seem to meet basic SOR research standards (see Figure 3).? It seems as if Dr. Moats and her LETRS family are given a free pass.? The question is, why?? Why are they not held to the same scientific standards as reading teachers?? Can a standard be said to be a standard if it is not standardized??

If we want to be responsible consumers of educational research, and if we truly want to call ourselves a “science” of reading, at the very least we would expect the research standards in Figure 3 to be used to evaluate strategies, practices, and programs such as LETRS. As we'll see in our December 10th webinar, it is not the case.

We are limited to 500 participants.? CEU certificates from Minnesota State University are available.? Register in advance for this free webinar: