One of the components that drew me to EBLI (Evidence-Based Literacy Instruction) was the minimization of teacher talk. As a tutor, I have students for 45 minutes to an hour 1-2 days a week with students. That’s all. It’s critical I make certain each minute is meaningful. One of the first times I heard Nora Chahbazi, EBLI founder, speak it was about minimizing teacher talk. Give a succinct explanation and example and have the students get right into the activity. Error correction is critical but that is quick as to not interrupt flow. When students do the work, they do the learning.

Emily Hanford, education journalist, released the first three episodes of her second season of Sold a Story this past week. The first season concentrated on how our country came to use curriculum in schools that did not match what scientists already knew about how children learn to read. This podcast shook the education and literacy world to its core and massive reforms were the result. Season 2 steps away from specific curriculum to hone in on instruction itself. She introduces her listeners to the man behind a teaching method called Direct instruction (DI). When I was in graduate school, this was akin to a swear word. This teaching method was a threat to constructivism, the student-led exploratory learning championed far and wide by teaching programs at universities across the country. My graduate program eschewed DI as oppressive and authoritarian.

Turns out, Direct Instruction is a highly effective and maybe the most impactful way to teach children. One of its guiding principles is minimizing teacher talk. Long-winded teacher explanations often confuse children, which makes a lot of sense. Direct Instruction also means more student participation. Working one-on-one with students, I understand how valuable this is. When I introduce a new word to spell, to define, to read, I ask students to repeat it back to me. I can correct pronunciation errors immediately. Direct Instruction became politicized and largely eschewed by our teaching colleges. I remember feeling anxious if I was standing in front of a class for too long, if I corrected a student too matter of factly and if I ever read from a teacher’s guide script. Soon into teaching, you refine practices and stop relying on what you learned in college as quite honestly most of it wasn’t rooted in science. And, what I did learn was that correcting children quickly, unemotionally without a long-winded explanation is more respectful, giving students structure is what they crave and asking students to do hard things is how we move them forward.

The founder of Direct Instruction Zig Englemann believed if a child wasn’t learning, it was the instruction. He was constantly refining instruction. Englemann also was developing this program in the 1960s and 70s before 1st graders were bringing guns to school and shooting teachers but he’s right. Instruction, both delivery and quality of, are critical pieces and often times there is nothing wrong with the child that instruction cannot fix. I think about all the perfectly capable children who did not learn to read in Whole Language classrooms.

Aside from minimizing teacher talk, there was one more standout idea in EBLI that convinced me to switch from Orton-Gllingham and that was giving students the hard stuff. EBLI does not wait to introduce multi-syllable words until simpler words are mastered. By lesson 2, students are staring down the barrel of decoding words like fantastic. It’s with a great amount of support that gradually gets lifted, but the bar is set high and working through difficult material is often what makes it stick, permanently.

Afterall, it’s about what works best for the kids. Something education historically has neglected.